LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, 



Shelf. ,~FfT 

mi 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 



THE APOSTOLIC 



CHURCH RESTORED: 



— OR, — 



History of Reformatory Movements 



RESULTING IN A 



restoration of the <Apostolic CSh>~ 






MOV 3i 1889 ' 



HISTORY OF THE NINETEEN GENERAL 
CHURCH COUNCILS. 



-= — 



^^ 



BY JOHN F." ROWE. 



Richwood, Ohio: 
Daniel Sommer, Proprietor and Publisher. 



\ 

\ 









Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1889, 

BY DANIEL SOMMER, 

In the office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 



PREFACE. 



In preparing this work for the public, we have drawn from the most 
reliable and distinguished authorities extant. We have prepared the 
work with much labor and patient research. The present work is the 
condensation of many volumes. For authorities, we have depended on 
such standard works as McCliniock and Strong's Encyclopedia, Encyclo- 
pedia Britannica, Chambers' Encyclopedia, Trof. George P. Fisher's His- 
tory of the Reformation, Philip Schaff ' s History of the Christian Churchy 
Neander's History of the Christian Religion and Church, and Prof. R. 
Richardson's Memoirs of Alexander Campbell. In delineating the devel- 
opment of the great apostasy from the original apostolic order of things, 
in describing the successive Protestant reformations, in setting forth the 
restoration and identification of the Church of Christ, as accomplished 
through the labors of Alexander Campbell and his coadjutors, and in 
giving a brief history of the nineteen GEcumenical Church Councils, we 
have followed the order of events as closely as it was possible to be done. 
We have aimed to give p'aces, dates, and authorities, and corroborating 
testimony from disinterested parties. In a word, if there is any relia- 
bility in history, it will be found in the following pages. We have 
aimed to present a systematic compendium of Reformatory Movements, 
and as such we ask our readers to receive our work, bating all imper- 
fections, as purely a labor of love. 

THE AUTHOR. 



(iii) 



INTRODUCTION 



For many years the writer has himself felt the pressing need of a work 
of this character. While young in the ministry, and comparatively poor, 
in possession of very few books, and having no access to large libraries, 
he continually felt himself hampered by the absence of books of reference, 
and felt himself crippled in his public ministrations because he could not 
find time, in his struggles to live above want, to ransack the pages of his- 
tory in quest of the desired information. The general reader needs just 
such a work as this, who, in a moment, by referring to the index, can find 
what he wants and satisfy himself. The preacher needs it for easy refer- 
ence, and especially the traveling evangelist, who can not pack a lot of 
books with him. The author of this work, having frequently desired a 
help of this kind, which he could carry with him, to aid him both in 
speaking and writing for the press, came to the conclusion that others 
might be greatly benefited by the matter contained in it. The author 
has for a long time had such a work in contemplation. It is not only in- 
tended for the Disciples of Christ, but it is also prepared with a view of 
circulating it among the various denominations, and with the purpose of 
inciting the independent and untrammeled thinkers in the denominations 
to investigate the pages of history to see if these things are so. 

Within the compass of this work, we have aimed to give a connected 
view of the Reformatory Movements: from Martin Luther down 10 thetimes 
of th i great reformer, Alexander Campbell. The reader will discover the 
fact that while such illustrious reformers as Luther, Zwingli, Melancthon, 
Calvin, Knox, and Wesley, only aimed at re-forming existing abuses and 



VI INTRODUCTION. 

immoralities in the Church, Campbell sought the complete restoration of 
apostolic principles and practices, and, having determined upon a work 
of that character, did actually raise up a body of people identical with 
primitive Christians, both in faith and practice. The plan of the work is 
as follows: 

I. A brief statement of the primitive order of things. 2. A sketch 
of the apostasy from the third century down to the times of Luther, or 
to the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. 3. A connected history 
of the Protestant period, which embraces the efforts made at reforma- 
tion during the space of three hundred years. 4. The Restoration 
of the Apostolic Church. 5. A history of the nineteen (Ecumenical 
Church Councils — the study of the proceedings of which is highly in- 
structive and interesting, they serving as a sort of spiritual thermometer 
of the troublous times of the Church, as the Church was manipulated by 
princes and priests. The various decrees of successive councils will show 
how kings and princes were deposed, the rivalries of ambitious men in 
Church and State, the origin of image worship, auricular confession, 
penance, the mass, celibacy, purgatory, prayers for the dead, transubstan- 
tiation, etc.. etc. The subjects we have enumerated should be studied 
as they are not studied in these days of flashy literature and fast living. 
There is entirely too much superficial reading done, even by ministers of 
the gospel, who should be in possession of a general knowledge of Church 
history, without which they will feel themselves more or less annoyed and 
crippled in their ministerial work. People who profess to be reformers 
can not very well progress as reformers unless they have an intelligent 
view of the situation, as we have outlined it in this work. 1 he general 
reader, engaged in secular employments, who has not the time to explore 
the pages of many volumes, and not even time to consult books of refer- 
ence, will, we feel confident, find this work of great advantage to him, 
that it will aid him very much in ascertaining the facts of history, and 
furnish him with facts and data with which to make just comparison be- 
tween truth and error, between what God has decreed, and what man has 
invented, and especially show him the difference between reforming imper- 
fect church organizations and restoring the Church of Christ as founded 
by the apostles. 



INTRODUCTION. Vll 

We should probably apologize to the general reader for investing por- 
tions of this work with a show of too much learning and too much refined 
scholarship ; but we found it impossible to prepare a work of this charac- 
ter — which is history condensed — and dress it up in a simple garb of 
words and terms of speech, without marring more or less the pages of 
history, and without doing injustice to the subjects treated and to the 
authors quoted. 

If the reader shall derive as much benefit and pleasure in perusing 
these pages, as the author has derived from the preparation of the work, 
the author will feel that he has not labored in vain. 



CONTENTS. 



PAGE, 
x rCI3.C6j .« a. «...«. < 2 

Introduction, ........... 5 

Contents, 8 



Chapter I. — The Primitive Church, . . . . . .11 

Chapter II. — Union of Church and State, 16 

Chapter III. — Conflict between Church and State, ... 19 

Chapter IV. — Culmination of the Papacy, . 22 

Chapter V. — The Papacy and Episcopacy, = . • . 27 

Chapter VI. — Leo X and Luther, . . . . . 9 31 

Chapter VII. — The Dawn of the Reformation, e » 34 

Chapter VIII. — The Mystics, .. 37 

Chapter IX.— Luther and the Man of Sin, „ . 40 

Chapter X. — Origin of the Augsburg Confession, ... 48 

Chapter XL — Reformation in Switzerland, ..... 5^ 

Chapter XII. — Origin of the Heidelberg Confession, . . 59 

(viii) 



CONTENTS. IX 

PAGE. 

Chapter XIII. — John Calvin and Calvinism, .... a 63 

Chapter XIV. — Origin c • the Church of England, . . . 71 

Chapter XV. — The Thirty-Nine Articles, ..... 75 

Chapter XVI. — The Book of Common Prayer, .... 80 

Chapter XVII. — Origin of the Westminster Confession of Faith, . 87 

Chapter XVIII. — Origin of Congregationalism, „ 94 

Chapter XIX. — American Congregationalism, . . . 97 

Chapter XX. — Origin of the Baptist Church, .... 102 

Chapter XXI. — The Baptist Church in the United States, . .112 

Chapter XXII. — Origin of Methodism, . . . . s 119 

Chapter XXIII. — Origin of the Methodist Episcopal Church, . 123 

Chapter XXIV. — Wesley not a Methodist, .... 128 

Chapter XXV. — The Reformation of the Nineteenth Century, . 136 

Chapter XXVI. — Attempts at Reformation, .... 144 

Chapter XXVII. —The Word of God the Sole Rule of Action, . 148 

Chapter XXVIII. — Attempts at Christian Union, . . . 153 

Chapter XXIX. — Fundamental Principles, . . . , I 157 

Chapter XXX. — The Restoration, . B . . . . 16 1 

Chapter XXXI.— The Bible the only Creed, 167 

Chapter XXXII. — Alexander Campbell Abandons Sectarianism, 1 7 [ 

Chapter XXXIII. — A. Campbell Unites with the Baptists, . . 17S 

Chapter XXXIV. — A Similar Reformation in Kentucky, . . 186 

Chapter XXXV. — The Church of Christ Identified, . . . 192 

Chapter XXXVI. — The Restoration of Apostolic Christianity, 199 



CONTENTS. 



1'AL.E 



20 



History of Church Councils, 

I. Apostolic Council, ....... 207 

II. Council of Nice, ........ 208 

The Nicene Creed, ........ 212 

Councils of Constantinople, ....... 218 

General Council of Ephesus, ...... 221 

Council of Chalcedon, ........ 223 

The Second Council of Nice, ...... 227 

Lateran Councils, . . . . . . , . .2*1 

The Councils of Lyons, ....... 246 

Councils of Vienne, ........ 246 

Council of Constance, ...-.., 249 

The Council at Basle, ........ 250 

Council of Trent, ........ 254 

Gospel Principles. 

Faith and Sight, . . . . . . . . .261 

Reformation of Life, ....... 273 

The Good Confession, ........ 280 

Immersion, ......... 286 

Immersion — Sprinkle — Pour. Which? ..... 299 

The Holy Spirit, ........ 306 

The Baptism in the Spirit, . . . . . . .312 

Impartation of the Holy Spirit by Apostolic Hands, . . 316 
The Word as Revealed by the Holy Spirit, . . . .319 

The Confirmation of the Revealed Word, .... 325 

The Gift of the Holy Spirit, 331 

The Witness of the Spirit, ...... 339 

The Law of the Spirit, ........ 344 



HISTORY OF 

Reformatory Movements. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 



One essential feature of Protestantism was the aboli- 
tion of the authority of the hierarchical order. In its 
mature form, as all history attests, the Reformation of 
the sixteenth century was a rejection of Papal and 
priestly authority. As antecedent to the rise of the 
Reformation, we propose to write several articles on the 
origin and progressive development of the hierarchical 
system. The Papacy began by invading the personal 
rights and prerogatives of the disciples of Christ, who 
stood upon a common plane of equality, and by insti- 
tuting a mediatorial priesthood, which, setting aside the 
office of the great Mediator, assumed to mediate be- 
tween God and man. It was an invasion of that order 
of heaven, as recorded in the New Testament, which 
gave liberty to the soul and direct access to the heavenly 
Father through the one High Priest of our salvation. 

(ii) 



12 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 

The rise of sacerdotalism destroyed the equality of dis- 
cipleship. The disciples of Christ, under apostolic 
teaching, formed a community of brethren, who were 
associated upon a broad basis of equality, all of them 
being illuminated and directed and united in the one 
Spirit. Their organization under Christ, was a marvel 
of simplicity, and very unlike that hierarchical system 
which in subsequent times overshadowed the Church of 
the living God — very dissimilar from the individual con- 
gregation where all the members served each other in 
love and faith. 

The New Testament records the fact that all Chris- 
tians, in a given locality, were united in one society, or 
ecclesia, the old Greek term for an assembly legally 
called and authorized. In each society there was a 
board of pastors, indifferently called elders, presbyters 
— a name taken from the synagogue — or interchange- 
ably styled bishops, overseers, a name given by the 
Greeks to persons charged with a guiding oversight in 
civil administration. In the election of these pastors — 
feeders of the flock — the body of disciples enjoyed a 
controlling voice, although as long as the apostles re- 
mained, their suggestions or appointments would natu- 
rally be accepted. These officers did not give up, at first, 
their secular employments; they were not even, at the 
outset, intrusted as a peculiar function with the business 
of teaching, which was free to all and especially imposed 
upon a class of persons who seemed designated by their 
various gifts for this work. The elders, with the dea- 
cons, whose business it was to look after the poor and 
to perform kindred duties, were the officers to whom 
each little separate community committed the lead in 
the management of its affairs. But, as we approach 
the close of the second century, we find marked changes; 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 13 

some of them of a portentous and dangerous character, 
and as already indicative of the fact that the apostasy 
had set in. The enlargement of the jurisdiction of bish- 
ops by extending it over dependent churches in the 
neighborhood of the towns and cities, and the multiply 
ing of church officers, were innovations significant of 
coming evils. By degrees church officers, by assuming 
powers which did not belong to them, grew into a dis- 
tinct order, and placed themselves above the "laity" as 
the appointed medium of conveying to them the grace 
of God. A church in the capital of a province, with its 
bishop, easily acquired a precedence over the other 
churches and bishops in the same district, and thus the 
metropolitan system grew up. A higher grade of emi- 
nence was accorded to the bishops and churches of the 
principal cities, such as Rome, Alexander and Ephesus; 
and thus we have the germs of a more extended hier- 
archical dominion. Even as early as the latter part of 
the second century, the Church has passed into the con- 
dition of a visible organized commonwealth. We find 
Irenasus, who was bishop of Lyons from 177 to 202, ut- 
tering the famous dictum that where the Church is — 
meaning the visible body with its clergy and sacraments 
— there is the Spirit of God, ami where the Spirit of 
God is there is the Church. To be cut off from this vis- 
ible Church is to be separated from Christ. By the 
clergy of that period, this church was made the door of 
access to the favor of God. We can also readily account 
for the importance that began to be attached to tradi- 
tion; for the defenders of the true Church of Christ 
against the corrupting encroachments of gnosticism, 
naturally fell back on the historical evidence afforded by 
the presence and testimony of the leading churches, 
which the apostles themselves had planted. Irenseus 



14 THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 

and Tertullian (the latter a presbyter at Carthage, where 
he died between the years 220 and 240), direct the in- 
quirer to go to Corinth, Rome, Ephesus, to the places 
where the apostles had taught, and ascertain whether 
the novel speculations of the time could justly claim the 
sanction of the first disciples of Christ, or had been 
transmitted from them. 

Says a distinguished author: "It is the pre-eminence 
of Rome, as the custodian of traditions, that Irenseus 
means to assert in a noted passage (lib. III. iii. 2) in 
which he exalts the Church.'' It was not long until the 
unity of the Church, as a visible, towering organization, 
was realized in the unity of the sacerdotal body. It 
was but a natural and logical sequence to seek and find 
a head for this traditionized and secularized body ; and 
where should it be found except in mystic Rome, the 
capital of the world, the seat of the predominating 
Church, where Paul had suffered martyrdom, and where 
many believed (but erroneously) that Peter also perished 
as a martyr. After the sacerdotal order had raised Peter 
to be chief of the apostles, and when, near the close of 
the second century, the idea was suggested and became 
current that Peter had served as bishop of the Roman 
Church, a strong foundation was laid in the minds of 
credulous men for a recognition of the primacy of that 
Church and of its chief pastor. The first mention of 
Peter as bishop of Rome is found in the Clementine 
Homilies, which were conrposed in the latter part of the 
second century. The habit of thus deferring to the see 
of Rome, as the center of ecclesiastical authority, so far 
advances upon the credulity of the people, that in the 
middle of the third century we find Cyprian, whose zeal 
for episcopal independence would not tolerate the sub- 
jection of one bishop to another, still speaking of that 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 15 

see as the chief source of sacerdotal unity. Rome was 
a mighty and a glorious city. The eyes of all nations 
were intently fixed upon it, as the metropolis of wealth 
and splendor and political power. It was an easy thing 
to transfer this awe and reverence to the Church which 
had its seat in the eternal City. Leo I., with arrogant 
pretensions, claimed that the Roman Empire was built 
with reference to Christianity, and that Rome, for this 
reason, was chosen for the bishopric of the chief of the 
apostles. Leo flourished in the fifth century. 



JKLOTS OF CHURCH AND STATE. 



The accession of Constantine (311) found the Church 
so firmly organized under its hierarchy that it co^ld not 
be absolutely merged in the State, as might have been 
the result had its constitution been different. But 
under him and his successors, the supremacy of the 
State, with a large control of ecclesiastical affairs,. was 
maintained by the emperors. General councils, for ex- 
ample, were convoked by them and presided over by 
their representatives, and con ciliary decrees published as 
laws of the Empire. The Roman bishops felt it to be 
an honor to be judged only by the emperor. In the 
closing period of imperial history, the emperors favored 
the ecclesiastical primacy of the Roman see, as a bond 
of unity in the Empire. Political disorders and con- 
flicting interests tended to elevate the position of the 
Roman bishop, especially when he was a person of mo; 3 
than ordinary talents and energy. Leo the Great (440- 
461), the first, perhaps, who had conferred upon him 
the title of Pope, proved himself a pillar of strength in 
the midst of tumult and anarchy His conspicuous 
services, as in shielding Rome from the incursions of 
barbarians and protecting its inhabitants, facilitated the 
exercise of a spiritual jurisdiction that stretched not only 
over Italy, but as far as Gaul and Africa. To him was 
given by Valentinian III. (445) an imperial declaration 
wYich mvAe him supreme over the Western Church, or 

(16) 



REF0UMA10KY MOVEMENTS. 17 

the Church of Rome. We can not follow the alterna- 
tions of the priestly powers of Rome, nor consume 
space by depicting the varying fortunes of popes and 
princes. We can record the fact that in the fifth 
centurv the fall of the Western Empire increased the 
authority of the bishop of Rome; we can speak of the 
spread of Mohammedanism from Africa and Spain into 
Europe; of the alliance of the Papacy with the Franks 
in 750; of the rescue of the Papacy by Pepin and 
Charlemagne, and of the coronation of the latter by the 
hands of the Pope, in the Basilica of St. Peter, on 
Christmas Day, 800. Taking advantage of the conflicts 
and disorders in the empire of Charlemagne, and seiz- 
ing the opportunity of his death, which created an era 
of political strife and unrest, the Roman bishops rapidly 
began to increase in power. It was in this period that 
the False or Pseudo Isoderian Decretals appeared. These 
false decretals introduced principles of ecclesiastical law 
which made the Church dependent on the State, and 
elevated the Roman See to a position unknown to pre 
ceding ages. The immunity and high prerogatives of 
bishops, the exaltation of primates, as the servile tools 
of the popes, above metropolitans who were slavishly 
dependent upon secular rulers, and the ascription of the 
highest legislative and judicial functions to the Roman 
Pontiff, were some of the leading and characteristic 
features of this spurious collection, which found its way 
into the codes of the canon law, and which radically 
modified the ancient ecclesiastical system. These false 
decretals first appeared about the middle of the ninth 
century, and they only needed a pope of sufficient talents 
and energy to give practical effect to such pernicious 
principles; and such an instrument appeared in the 
person of Nicholas I, between the years 858 and 867. 
2 



■■** 



18 UNION OF CHURCH AND STATE. 

Availing himself of a favorable opportunity, he brought 
Lothair II., king of Lorraine, under the censure of the 
Church, whom, in a case of matrimony, he compelled 
to submit to the decrees of the Papacy, while at the 
same time he deposed the archbishops who had en- 
deavored to thwart his purpose. At the same time, 
Nicholas humbled Hincmar, the powerful archbishop 
of Rheims, who had disregarded the appeal which one 
of his bishops had made to Rome. 

According to Baronius, a distinguished Roman Catho- 
lic annalist, the anarchical condition into which the em- 
pire ultimately fell, left the Papacy, for a century and a 
half, the prey of Italian factions, by the agency of which 
the papal office was reduced to a lower point of moral 
degradation than it ever reached before or since. This 
period of moral and social debasement — during a con- 
siderable portion of which time harlots disposed of the 
papal office, and their paramours wore the tiara — was 
interrupted by the intervention of the German sover- 
eigns, Otho I. and Otho II. ; with the first of whom the 
Holy Roman Empire, in the sense in which the name is 
used in subsequent ages, the secular counterpart of the 
Papacy, derives its origin. The pontiffs preferred the 
sway of the emperors to that of the lawless Italian 
barons, says Yon Raumer. This dark period, in which 
nearly all traces of apostolic usages disappeared, was 
terminated by Henry III., who appeared in Italy at the 
head of an army, and, in 1046, at the Synod of Sutri, 
which he had convoked, dethroned three rival popes, 
and raised to the vacant office one of his own bishops. 
The imperial office had passed into the hands of the 
German kings, and they, like their Carlovingian prede- 
cessors, whose acts in history we have purposely omitted, 
rescued the Papacy from destruction. 



CONFLICT BETWEEN* CHURCH AND STATE. 



When we reach the age of Hildehrand (1073 — 1085), 
we find plots and counterplots the order of the day. 
While this pretended reformer apparently sought a 
thorough reformation of morals and a restoration of 
ecclesiastical order and sacerdotal discipline, he under- 
took at the same time to subordinate the State to the 
Church, and to subject the Church, such as it was, to 
the absolute authority of the Pope. The course pursued 
by Hildebrand and by aspiring pontiffs who succeeded 
him, in the course of time, resulted in an open conflict 
between the Papacy and the Empire. Here follows a 
severe and persistent contest, in which the Papacy gain 
a decided advantage. That the emperor was commis- 
sioned to preside over the temporal affairs of men, while 
it was left for the Pope to guide and govern them in 
things spiritual, was a criterion too vague for defining 
the limits of temporal and spiritual jurisdiction. The 
co-ordination, the equilibrium of the civil and ecclesias- 
tical powers, was a relation with which, as any one 
might know, who is conversant with the history of 
despotic governments, neither party would be content. 
It was a struggle on both sides for universal monarchy. 
The apostolic order of things now completely fades out 
of view. The popes, by continual strategy and rare 
diplomacy, gained an ascendency over Western Europe, 
and, for successive years, the Pope everywhere was the 

(19) 



20 CONFLICT BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE. 

acknowledged head of Latin Christianity. Sometimes 
the Roman pontiffs, when they saw an opportunity of 
centralizing and consolidating their system of spiritual 
despotism, became the champions then, as they have 
frequently since, as suits their base designs, of popular 
freedom. Acting in the role of Mephistopheles, they 
can, in turn, become republicans, monarchists, democrats, 
autocrats and imperialists, if by such transformation 
they can subserve the interests of the Papacy. The end 
sanctities the means. The humiliation of Henry IV. in 
1077, whom Hildebrand kept waiting during three 
winter days, in the garb of a penitent, in the yard of 
the castle of Canossa, gives evidence of the supremacy 
of the Papacy in the medieval age. The Worms Con- 
cordat which Calixtus II. concluded with Henry V. in 
1122, and the acknowledgment which Frederick Bar- 
barossa made of his sin and error to Alexander III. at 
Venice, in 1177, after a long contest for imperial preroga- 
tives, are facts which furnish evidence of the triumph 
of the Papacy. The triumph of the Papacy appeared 
complete when Gregory X. (1271-1276) directed the 
electoral princes to choose an emperor within a given 
interval, and threatened, in case they refused compliance 
with the mandate, to appoint, in conjunction with his 
cardinals, an emperor for them; and when Rudolph of 
Hapsburg, whom the} 7 proceeded to select, acknowl- 
edged in the most unreserved and subservient manner 
the Pope's supremacy. 

These are strange developments of church affairs, 
compared with the origin of Christianity and primitive 
gospel simplicity. The facts that we glean and scrap 
from the Dark Ages, are the full fruitage of the work- 
ings of the "mystery of iniquity" alluded to by the 
apostle Paul. It is impossible to furnish the details of 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 

history within our limited space, but it is our purpose 
to give a connected view of the rise and development 
of the Papacy, and to represent in as few words as possi- 
ble the ruin of the ancient Church, and the subsequent 
growth of an apostate Church. And this we do in 
order to show the relation which Romanism sustains to 
Protestantism, and the relation which we sustain to both 
these in our plea for a perfectly restored Christianity. 
That there was a remnant of the true worshipers of God 
found here and there, during the Dark Ages, such as 
the Nestorians, is a pleasing fact well established in 
history; but that nearly all traces of the primitive order 
of things, as established by the apostles of Jesus Christ, 
are lost sight of in the raging conflicts of rival princes 
and aspiring ecclesiastics, both of which powers, as they 
alternated repeatedly between victory and defeat, crushed 
down the liberties of the people and despoiled them of 
their personal rights, are facts patent and intelligible to 
all readers of history. We wish the people of this 
generation, as well as the people of succeeding genera- 
tions, to know the reasons why we stand apart from all 
denominations, Papal and Protestant, and why we pro- 
pose to stand only upon apostolic ground. 



CULMINATION OF THE PAPACY. 



From the best authorities we have consulted, we learn 
that it was during the progress of the struggle with the 
empire that the Papal powers may be said to have cul- 
minated. In the period between 1198 and 1216, in 
which Innocent III. reigned, the Papal despotism shone 
forth in all its ecclesiastical splendor. The enforcement 
of celibacy had placed the entire body of the clergy in 
a closer relation to the sovereign Pontiff. The Vicar of 
Peter had become the Yicar of God and of Christ. The 
idea of a Theocracy on earth, in which the Pope should 
presumptuously rule in this character, fully possessed 
the mind of Innocent, who, having profited by the bold- 
ness, and persistency, and political finesse of Gregory 
"VII., excelled the latter in diplomacy and political strat- 
egy. He worked himself up to believe that the two 
swords of temporal and ecclesiastical power had both 
been given to Peter and his successors, so that the 
earthly sovereign derived his prerogative from the great 
Head of the Church. The Pope was constituted to shine 
as the great luminary of the world, and the king or civil 
ruler could only shine from borrowed light. Acting on 
this theory — the consummation of spiritual despotism — 
Innocent assumed the position of arbiter in the conflicts 
of nations, and claimed the right to dethrone kings and 
princes at his pleasure. We have not space to give ex- 

(22) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 23 

aniples of his despotism, with which the pages of his- 
tory are disgraced. 

' In the Church he assumed the character of universal 
bishop, based upon the theory that all episcopal power 
was originally deposited in Peter and in his successors, 
and communicated through this source to bishops, who 
were in this manner constituted the only vicars of the 
Pope, and who might at any time be deposed at the 
will or heck of the Pope. To him belonged all legisla- 
tive authority, councils having merely a deliberate 
power, while the right to convoke them and to ratify or 
annul their proceedings belonged exclusively to him. 
He alone, in the role of an absolute autocrat, was 
exempt from all law, and might dispense with them in 
the case of others. Even the doctrine of Papal infalli- 
bility, which brought forth its legitimate fruit in the 
reign of Pope Pius IX., was discovered in the writings 
of Thomas Aquinas, the most eminent theologian of 
that age. As the feudal system gradually gave way to 
political monarchy, so the independency of the churches 
was absorbed and concentrated in the Pope. The right 
to confirm the appointment of all bishops, the right 
even to nominate bishops and to dispose of all bene- 
fices, the exclusive right of absolution, canonization 
and dispensation, the right to assess the churches — such 
were some of the iniquitous prerogatives, for the en- 
forcement of which Papal legates, clothed with limitless 
powers, were commissioned to penetrate all the coun- 
tries of Europe, in order to override the authority of 
bishops and of local ecclesiastical tribunals. About 
this time originated the famous mendicant orders of St. 
Francis and St. Dominic, from which beggarly institu- 
tions there came forth a swarm of itinerant preachers, 
who, as the pets of the Pope, were very intimately asso- 



24 CULMINATION OF THE PAPACY. 

ciated with his pontifical Highness, and who were ever 
ready, as pliant tools, to defend Papal prerogatives and 
Papal extortions against whatever opposition might 
arise from the secular clergy. Insinuating themselves, 
serpent-like, within the walls of the universities of 
Europe, they denned and defended, in lectures replete 
with subtilties and sophistries, and by a pretended array 
of scholastic wisdom, all the usurpations of the Papacy. 
Conflicts between popes and temporal princes contin- 
ued. The Papal assertions in regard to the two swords 
the supremacy of the ecclesiastical over the secular 
power, and the subjection of every living soul to the 
Pope, who judges all and is judged by none, were met 
by a united and determined resistance on the part of 
the French people. When Boniface VIII. summoned 
the French clergy to Rome to sit in judgment on the 
acts of the king, the summons aroused a storm of in- 
dignation. The Papal Bull, snatched from the hand of 
the legate, was publicly burned in Notre Dame, on the 
11th of February, 1302. The insulted clergy of France 
flatly denied the proposition that in secular affairs, the 
Pope stands above the king. The prestige of the 
Papacy now began to wane rapidly. There was an ex- 
pansion of knowledge in every direction. Political re- 
formers came to the front. Literature began to spread, 
and poets and jurists, of learning and distinction, began 
to exert a powerful' influence in the direction of civil 
and religious liberty. There comes the period of the 
Babylonian captivity, or the long residence of the 
Pope at Avignon — called the Babylonian captivity, 
because it continued about as long as the captivity of 
the Jews in ancient Babylon — and the period of the 
great schism, when, during a great part of this period, 
the Papacy was enslaved to France, and served the 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 25 

behests of the French court. Various forms of ecclesi- 
astical oppression followed, which involved Germany, 
England, and other countries in humiliation. The 
revenues of the court at Avignon were supplied by 
means of extortions and usurpations which had hitherto 
been without parallel. Every form of extortion was 
resorted to for replenishing the Papal treasury. France 
was willing, as long as the Fapacy remained her tool, to 
indulge the popes in extravagant assumptions of au- 
thority. Avignon became the headquarters of an ex- 
tremely luxurious and profligate court — a cesspool of vice 
— the boundless immorality of which has been vividly 
depicted by Petrarch, who himself was an eye-witness 
to the shameful abominations. Then arose the great 
battle of the fourteenth century, between the Monarch- 
ists and the Papists, when such celebrated writers as 
Marsilius of Padua, William of Occam, and Dante, as 
the defenders of the " Monarchists," vigorously de- 
nounced the presumptions of the Papacy. " These bold 
writings attacked the collective hierarchy in all its fun- 
damental principles; they inquired, with a sharpness of 
criticism before unknown, into the nature of the priestly 
office; they restricted the notion of heresy, to which 
the Church had given so wide an extension ; they ap- 
pealed, finally, to the Holy Scriptures, as the only valid 
authority in matters of faith. As fervent monarchists, 
these theologians subjected the Church to the State. 
Their heretical tendencies announced a new process in 
the minds of men, in which the unity of the Catholic 
Church went down." 

During the schism which ensued upon the election of 
Urban VI., in 1378, there was presented before Christen- 
dom the spectacle of rival popes imprecating curses 
upon each other; each with his court to be maintained 
3 



26 CULMINATION OF THE PAPACY, 

by taxes and contributions, which had to be largely in- 
creased on account of the division. When men were 
compelled to choose between rival claimants of the 
office, it was inevitable that there should arise a still 
deeper investigation into the origin and grounds of 
Papal authority. Inquirers reverted to the earlier ages 
of the Church, in order to find both the causes and the 
cure of the dreadful evils under which Christian society 
was suffering. More than one jurist and theologian 
called attention to the ambition of the popes for secular 
rule and to their oppressive domination over the 
Church, as the prime fountain of this frightful disorder. 
{History of the Reformation, by George P, Fisher.) 



THE PAPACY AND EPISCOPACY. 



A fruitless attempt was made, at about this period, to 
reform the Church "in head and members." Princes 
interposed to make peace between popes, as popes had 
before interposed to produce peace between princes. 
According to Laurent (La JReforme), it is the era of the 
Reforming councils of Pisa, Constance, and Basel, 
when, largely under the leadership of the Paris theo- 
logians (1409-1443) a reformation in the morals and ad- 
ministration of the Church was sought through the 
agency of these great assemblies. It was now a conflict 
for supremacy between Papacy and Episcopacy. The 
Pope was regarded as primate of the Church, but at the 
same time it was asserted that bishops derived their 
grace and authority for the discharge of their office, 
not from the Pope, but from the same source as that 
from which he derived his powers. * It was held that 
the Church, when convened by its representatives in a 
general council, is the supreme council, to which the 
Pope himself is subordinate and responsible. "Their 
aim," says Prof. Fisher, " was to reduce him to the rank 
of a constitutional instead of an absolute monarch. 
The Gallican theologians held to an infallibility resid- 
ing somewhere in the Church; most of them, and 
ultimately all of them, placing this infallibility in ecu- 
menical councils. The flattering hopes under which 
the Council of Pisa opened its proceedings, were 

(27) 



28 THE PAPACY AND EPISCOPACY. 

doomed to disappointment, in consequence of the re- 
luctance of the reformers to push through their meas- 
ures without a pope, and the failure of Alexander V. to 
redeem the pledges which he had made them prior to 
his election. Moreover, the schism continued, with 
three popes in the room of two. The Council of Con- 
stance began under the fairest auspices. The resolve 
to vote by nations was a significant sign of a new order 
of things, and crushed the design of the flagitious Pope, 
John XXIII., to control the assembly by the preponder- 
ance of Italian votes. Solemn declarations of the su- 
premacy and authority of the Council were adopted, 
and were carried out in the actual deposition of the 
infamous Pope. But the plans of reform were mostly 
wrecked on the same rock on which they had broken at 
Pisa. A pope must be elected; and Martin V., once 
chosen, by skillful management and by separate ar- 
rangements with different princes, was unable to undo, 
to a great extent, the salutary work of the Council, and 
even before its adjournment to reassert the very doctrine 
of Papal superiority which the Council had repudiated. 
The substantial failure of this Council, the most august 
ecclesiastical assemblage of the Middle Ages, to achieve 
reforms which thoughtful and good men everywhere 
deemed indispensable, was a proof that some more radi- 
cal means of reformation would have to be adopted. 
But another grand effort in the same direction was put 
forth; and the Council of Basel, notwithstanding that 
it adopted numerous measures of a beneficent character, 
which were acceptable to the Catholic nations, had, at 
last, no better issue: for most of the advantages that 
were granted to them, and the concessions that were 
made by the popes, especially to Germany, they con- 
trived afterward, by adroit diplomacy, to recall." 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 29 

History gives abundant evidence of the fact that no 
good ever came from human councils, which undertook 
to interfere with and modify the doctrine and govern- 
ment of the Church of Christ. Only evil, and unmiti- 
gated evil, ever emanated from such a source. The 
fifteenth century was characterized by national rivalries, 
and by the plots and counterplots of aspiring princes, 
who served the Papal cause, or compelled the Papacy to 
serve them, as self-interest might dictate. It is difficult 
to tell which exercised the most chicanery, and which 
practiced the most intrigue, or which sank to the lowest 
depths to gain power — the civil or ecclesiastical powers. 
One thing is certain, and that is, that selfishness reigned 
supreme. In illustration of this statement, it is recorded 
that Innocent VIII., besides advancing the fortunes of 
seven illegitimate children, and w T aging two wars with 
Naples, received an annual tribute from the Sultan for 
detaining his brother and rival in prison, instead of 
sending him to lead a force against the Turks, the ene- 
mies and despoilers of Christendom. Alexander VI., 
whose deep depravity recalls the dark days of the 
Papacy in the tenth century, busied himself in founding 
a principality for his favorite son, that monster of in- 
iquity, Caesar Borgia, and in amassing treasures, by 
base and cruel means, for the support of the licentious 
Roman Court. He is said to have died of the poison 
which he had caused to be prepared for a wealthy car- 
dinal, who bribed the head cook to set it before the 
Pope himself. If Julius II. satisfied the extortionate 
demands of his relatives in a more peaceable way, he 
still found his enjoyment in carnal war and savage con- 
quest, and made it his chief occupation to the States of 
the Church. . According to the testimony of G-ieseler, 
the eminent German historian, he organized alliances 



30 THE PAPACY AND EPISCOPACY. 

and defeated one enemy after another, forcing Venice 
to submit to his outrages, and not hesitating, old man 
as he was, to take the field himself, in the time of 
winter. In 1510, having brought in the French, and 
having joined the league of Cambray for the sake of 
subduing Venice, he called to his aid the Venetians for 
the expulsion of the French. The Church, and es- 
pecially the priesthood of Rome, had become thor- 
oughly demoralized; and this was the condition of 
things on the eve of the reformation of the sixteenth 
century. 



LEO X. AKD LUTHER. 



At the opening of the Reformation, Leo X. was made 
a cardinal at the age of thirteen, and elected Pope at the 
age of thirty-seven. He was more " familiar with the 
fables of Greece, and the delights of the poets, than with 
the history of the Church and the doctrine of the 
Fathers." He indulged in profane studies, and gave 
much of his time to hunting, jesting and pageants. He 
sported in a gay and luxurious court, and made religion 
subordinate to the fascinations of literature, art and 
music. Vast sums of money, which his religious subjects 
were obliged to contribute, were lavished upon his rel- 
atives, and the historian Ranke has characterized his 
habits of life as "a sort of intellectual sensuality." 
Luther began his Reformation in the reign of this cold- 
hearted Pope. "During the Middle Ages," says Cole- 
ridge, " the Papacy was another name for a confedera- 
tion of learned men in the west of Europe against the 
barbarians and ignorance of the times. The Pope was 
the chief of this confederac}-; and, so long as he re- 
tained that character, his power was just and irresistible. 
It was the principal means of preserving for us and for 
all posterity all that we now have of the illumination 
of past ages. But as soon as the Pope made a separation 
between his character as premier clerk in Christendom 
and as a secular prince — as soon as he began to squab- 
ble for towns and castles — then he at once broke the 

(31) 



32 LEO X. AND LUTHEK. 

charm and gave birth to a revolution. Everywhere, 
but especially throughout the North of Europe, the 
breach of feeling and sympathy went on widening ; so 
that all Germany, England, Scotland and other countries, 
started, like giants out of their sleep, at the first blast 
of Luther's trumpet." (Table Talk, July 24, 1832.) 

Coleridge may have seen a special providence in the 
rise of the Papacy, as a "confederation of learned men 
in the west of Europe;" bat we can not see the special 
providence. We see the Papacy, with all its worldly 
wisdom, sagacity, duplicity, diplomacy; with all its 
arrogance, assumption of power, corruptions and abomi- 
nations. We also see its downfall at the approach of 
Bible knowledge, apostolic teaching and popular edu- 
cation. 

The age immediately preceding the Lutheran Refor- 
mation was characterized by the dogmatic system, as 
elaborated by the schoolmen from the abundant materials 
furnished by tradition and sanctioned by the mongrel 
Church; which constituted a vast body of mystic and 
scholastic doctrine, and which every man of the least 
religious pretensions was bound to accept in all particu- 
lars, or come under the ban of excommunication. The 
polity of the mongrel Church lodged all ecclesiastical 
rule in the hands of a superior class, the besotted priest- 
hood, who were commissioned as the indispensable al- 
moners of divine grace. The worship centered in the 
sacrifice of the mass, a constantly repeated miracle 
wrought by the hands of the wily and winsome priest. 
Justification by meritorious works, without respect to 
character and a godly life, was stereotyped into a wicked 
dogma, which was eating out the vitals of all religious 
life. Human merit was substituted for the mercy of 
God. A religion of external performances, which con- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. ii3 

sisted in quantity rather than in quality, and various 
modes of pretentious abstinences, with the institution 
of monasticism and the celibacy of the priesthood, were 
prominent features in the existing order of things. 
According to Ullman (Reformat or en von der Reformation) 
the masses, pilgrimages, fastings, flagellations, prayers 
to saints, homage to their relics and images and similar 
features so prominent in medieval mysticism, which 
passed as piety, illustrate the essential character of the 
times. 

The forerunners of the Reformation have been prop- 
erly divided," says Prof. Fisher, quoting from Dr. Ull- 
man, "into two classes. The first of them consists of 
the men who, in the quiet path of theological research 
and teaching, or by practical exertions in behalf of a 
contemplative, spiritual tone of piety, were undermining 
the traditional system. The second embraces names 
who are better known, for the reason that they at- 
tempted to carry out their ideas practically in the way 
of effecting ecclesiastical changes. The first class are 
more obscure, but were not less influential in preparing 
the ground for the Reformation. Protestantism was a 
return to the Scriptures as the authentic source of Chris- 
tian knowledge, and to the principle that salvation, that 
inw r ard peace, is not from the Church or from human 
works, ethical or ceremonial, but through Christ alone, 
received by the soul in an act of trust. Whoever, 
whether in the chair of theology, in the pulpit, through 
the devotional treatise, or by fostering the study of 
languages and of history, or in perilous combat with 
ecclesiastical abuses, drew the minds of men to the 
Scriptures and to a more spiritual conception of religion, 
was, in a greater or less measure, a reformer before the 
Reformation. 



THE DAWN OF THE REFORMATION. 



From the twelfth century down to the dawn of the 
Reformation, there were found here and there, especially 
in Southern France and Northern Italy, " anti-sacerdotal 
sects," who indulged in vehement invectives against the 
shameful immoralities of the priesthood and their bane- 
ful usurpations of power. Among these sects in Southern 
France, we may mention the noted Albigenses, who 
vigorously opposed the authority of ecclesiastical tradi- 
tion and of the hierarchy, but who were finally crushed 
out of existence by means of a bloody and heartless 
crusade, instigated by Innocent III., and which, through 
his agency, was followed up by the iniquitous Inquisi- 
tion, which here had its origin. "Catharists" was a 
general name applied to these anti-sacerdotal sects. 
Succeeding the Albigenses, there appear in 1170, the 
Waldenses, under the leadership of Peter Waldo, of 
Lyons. Because of their attachment to the Scriptures, 
and of their fiery opposition to clerical usurpation and 
profligacy, they also became forerunners of the Refor- 
mation. Disaffection and unrest, and a stubborn re- 
sistance against the aggressions of the priesthood, were 
experienced in all quarters, especially among the poor 
and dependent classes. 

The Inquisition had done its bloody work in the ex- 
tirpation of all such heretics as the Albigenses and the 
Waldenses. More radical and influential reformers have 

(34) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 35 

now moved to the front, such as Huss, Jerome of Prague 
and John Wickliffe. But the theologians of Paris made 
themselves infamous and almost outstripped their Papal 
antagonists, during the sessions of the Council of Con- 
stance, in their violent treatment of Huss, and in the 
alacrity with which they condemned him and Jerome 
to the stake. One hundred and fifty years before the 
days of Luther, Wickliffe proved himself a formidable 
antagonist to the pretensions of the Papacy. He an- 
ticipated the grand reformation with a knowledge of 
the religious situation, with a perspicuity of genius, and 
by apostolic blows of radical reform, that shook the 
very foundations of the Papal edifice. He set aside 
Papal decrees by a direct appeal to the Holy Scriptures. 
He denies transubstantiation; he boldly asserts that in 
the primitive Church there were only two classes of 
church officers; denies that there is scriptural authority 
for the rites of confirmation and extreme unction; ad- 
vocates non-interference on the part of the clergy with 
civil affairs and temporal authority; condemns auricular 
confession; holds that the exercise of the power to bind 
and loose is of no effect, unless it conforms to the 
doctrine of Christ; is opposed to the multiplied ranks 
of the clergy — popes, cardinals, patriarchs, monks, 
canons, ' et. al.; repudiates the doctrine of indulgences 
and supererogatory merits, the doctrine of the excel- 
lence of poverty, as that was held and as it lay at the 
foundation of the mendicant orders; and he sets him- 
self against artificial church music, pictures in worship, 
consecration with the use of oil and salt, canonization, 
pilgrimages, church asylums for criminals, and the celi- 
bacy of the clergy. These facts are all clearly authenti- 
cated by reliable historians. The followers of Wickliffe 
were called Lollards. It is a remarkable fact that Wick- 



ij6 THE DAWN OF THE REFORMATION. 

liffe predicted that from the monks themselves there 
would arise men who would abandon their false inter- 
pretations of Scriptures, and, returning to the apostolic 
order of things, would reconstruct the Church in the 
spirit of Paul. The work of reform as inaugurated by 
Wickliffe, we may remark, in passing, presents many 
features resembling the work of reform as inaugurated 
by Thomas and Alexander Campbell. The latter was 
an ardent admirer of the illustrious Wickliffe. It was 
in the Council of Constance that Huss asserted the 
right of private judgment. This was going behind the 
Council; and for his temerity he was commanded to 
retract his avowals of opinion, which he refused to do 
until he could be convinced by argument and by cita- 
tions from the Scriptures, that his sentiments were er- 
roneous. The right of private judgment became one 
of the prominent and distinctive principles of Protest- 
antism. Other reformers sprung up, whom we can not 
mention, such as the distinguished and eloquent Savon- 
arola, who lived at Florence, where he carried on his 
work of moral reform, until his death in 1498. He ex- 
posed the demoralized condition of the mongrel Church, 
and for laying bare the rottenness of the Papal system, 
he forfeited his life under the flagitious Alexander VI., 
but predicted a coming reformation. 



THE MYSTICS. 



The Reformation of the sixteenth century was pre- 
ceded by a school of men, called Mystics, of whom the 
noted Anselm was the father. The characteristic of 
the Mystics is the sensation of feeling, rather than of 
believing; the preference of intuition to logic, the quest 
for knowledge through light imparted to feeling, rather 
than by processes of the intellect; the indwelling of 
God in the soul, elevated to a holy calm by the con- 
sciousness of his presence; absolute self-renunciation 
and the absorption of the human will into the divine; 
silent meditation and the ecstatic mood. The character- 
istic spirit of this mystical school, which was a recoil 
from dogmatic theology, and from the extravagant use 
of outward sacraments and ceremonies, was illustrated 
by Thomas a Kempis, in his celebrated work, entitled 
"The Imitation of Christ," which it is said has probably 
had a larger circulation than any other book except the 
Bible. Luther himself was more or less influenced by 
the doctrines of the M}'stics, especially by the writings 
of John Tauler and Thomas a Kempis. 

The Reformation was preceded by a revival of learn- 
ing — a new eia of intellectual culture — in which three 
eminent writers — Dante, Petrarch and Boccaccio — made 
themselves distinguished. Scholasticism, which for sev- 
eral hundred years had been dominant in the medieval 
ages, gradually gave way as books began to multiply, 

(37) 



38 THE MYSTICS. 

and as the Scriptures continued to be translated into 
the native languages of the people. The Schoolmen 
and the Mystics began to retire to the background im- 
mediately upon the introduction of the art of printing, 
and as distinguished scholars, coming to the front, 
began to test the doctrinal and ecclesiastical system of 
that age by a translation of the Old and ISTew Testament 
from the original, the original fountain of truth having 
been oppressed by the Papacy, and the mass of the 
people deprived of the key of knowledge. The gigan- 
tic fabric of Latin Christianity, that vast receptacle of 
idolatry and Pagan superstition, began to quake at the 
near approach of intelligent faith and reason, and of 
civil and religious liberty. The Papacy could no longer 
endure the light of investigation. But the revival of 
literature in Italy was, to a considerable extent, the re- 
vival of Paganism. " Even an Epicurean infidelity," 
says Prof. Fisher in his History of the Reformation, "as 
to the foundation of religion, which was caught from 
Lucretius and from the dialogues of Cicero, infected a 
wide circle of literary men. Preachers, in a strain of 
florid rhetoric, would associate the names of Greek and 
Roman heroes with those of the apostles and saints, and 
with the name of the Savior himself. If an example 
of distinguished piety was required, reference would be 
made to Numa Pompilius. So prevalent was disbelief 
respecting the fundamental truths of natural religion 
that the Council of the Lateran, under Leo X., felt 
called upon to affirm the immortality and individuality 
of the soul." It appeared as if the gods of the old 
mythology had risen from the dead, if we may judge by 
the sentiments of the poets and rhetoricians of that 
literary revival, "while in the minds of thinking men 
Plato and Plotinus had supplanted Paul and Isaiah." 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 39 

The influence of the classic school upon the Church in 
Italy, as described by Guizot {History of Civilization, lect. 
xi.), is fearful to contemplate. As a specimen of his 
delineation of the crookedness of the times, he says 
that the Church in Italy "gave herself up to all the 
pleasures of an indolent, elegant, licentious civilization; 
to a taste for letters, the arts, and social and physical 
enjoyments." 

On the principle that like causes produce like effects, 
may not the study of the same classics revive a love for 
Pagan literature in our times; and is it not now the 
tendency of pulpit rhetoricians, as they come from our 
colleges dripping with the distillations of Pagan philoso- 
phy, to supplant Paul and Isaiah by the introduction of 
Plato and Plotinus? And how often do we hear college 
fledglings, and some older ones, who consider themselves 
''advanced thinkers," associating the names of Greek 
and Roman heroes with those of the apostles and saints, 
a id even with the name of the Savior himself. 

The religious condition of things in Germany, at the 
outbreak of the Reformation, was far different from 
that of Italy. Reuchlin and Erasmus, two of the most 
eminent scholars of the age, taking advantage of the 
revival of literature, made it contribute to the purifica- 
tion of the morals of the people, and to an earnest and 
vigorous investigation of the Scriptures. These were 
the men who furnished Luther, the great champion of 
the Reformation, with the literary munitions of war 
that crushed the dominion of the Papacy, and which 
liberated the masses from ignorance and foul superstition. 



LUTHER AKD THE MAN OF SIK 



The people of this generation have a just right to 
know why we propose, and strenuously labor for, a 
thorough restoration of the apostolic order of things, 
and why, religiously, we reject all human authority and 
accept only the law and authority of Jesus the Christ, 
For more than a half century we have kept this grand 
proposition before the eyes of all men. It is due to the 
rising generation — doubly due to our own children — 
that we should furnish the most substantial reasons for 
having inaugurated a movement as radical and far-reach- 
ing as that which was inaugurated by Christ and his 
apostles. We propose more than a reformation of refor- 
mations. We go back of all reformations, and plant 
ourselves upon apostolic ground. It is a fact patent to 
all men acquainted with ecclesiastical history, that there 
is not a Protestant denomination in existence that has 
entirely emerged from the great apostasy, of 1260 years' 
continuance, and that has effectively cleared itself of the 
mystic influences of Spiritual Babylon. No denomina- 
tion, however respectable it may appear in the eyes of 
the world, can claim identity with the Church of Christ, 
as founded by his apostles, as long as it countenances 
human dogmas, substitutes theories for facts, supplants 
the law and authority of Christ by laws of expediency, 
changes the ordinances of the Church, mystifies the 
design of the ordinances, bears titles which the Spirit 

(40) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 41 

never authorized, and carnalizes the worship of the true 
and living God. 

It is our purpose, in these essays, to show the origin 
and drift of the several reformations from the days of 
Luther down to the present time, and to show also, in 
tracing out these events, that not one of the so-called 
reformatory movements ever resulted in the full restora- 
tion of Apostolic Christianity. We write for those who 
neither read nor investigate, but who ought to read and 
investigate. Many of our own people, which statement 
includes many of our own preachers, are not posted on 
these questions as they ought to be, while professing at 
the same time to stand upon the only true and tenable 
ground. 

Luther was a great power in crushing the Man of Sin, 
but he did not succeed in grinding him to powder. 
Luther was first aroused by the visible presence of a 
corrupt priesthood. The origin of the Reformation of 
the sixteenth century was quite humble and somewhat 
indehnite. Pope Leo X. had arranged for a very exten- 
sive sale of indulgences. He gave out as a pretext for 
the outrage that the proceeds of the sale were intended 
for a war against the Turks and the erection of St. 
Peter's Church. It was quite generally believed that 
the real destination of the money was to defray the ex- 
orbitant expenditures of the Pope's court and to serve 
as a marriage dowry of his sister. Archbishop Albert, 
of Mentz, a man whose character was no better than 
that of Leo X., authorized the sale in Germany on con- 
dition that fifty per cent, should flow into his own 
pocket. Tetzel, a Dominican friar, carried on the trade 
with such a dash of effrontery as to outrage the senti- 
ments of thousands of honest and sincere people. 
Luther, then a young monk in an Augustinian convent, 
4 



42 LUTHEK AND THE MAN uF SiN. 

was among the first to rise against this profanation of 
pure religion, and to conscientiously protest against the 
abomination. When a young student, he had been 
driven by his anxiety for the salvation of his soul into 
the seclusion of a convent. After long doubts and 
many mental troubles, he had derived from a profound 
study of the Scriptures, and of the writings of Augus- 
tine and Tauler, the consolatory belief that man is to be 
saved, not by his own works of righteousness, but by 
faith in God through Jesus Christ. As an earnest Chris* 
tian man, who had taken upon himself a solemn obliga- 
tion to teach a pure religion, and who, as we have reason 
to believe, sincerely believed in the Christianity of the 
Holy Scriptures, he felt himself impelled to enter an 
energetic protest against the daring deeds of Tetzel. In 
accordance with the principles of the Church of Rome, 
he addressed himself to several neighboring bishops, 
urging them to stop the sale of indulgences; but, not 
heeding his appeal, he resolved to act upon his own ac- 
count. 

It was on the eve of All-Saints' Day, October 31, 1517, 
that he affixed to the Castle Church of Wittenberg the 
celebrated ninety-five theses, which bold act has gener- 
ally been regarded as the beginning of the Lutheran 
Reformation. But both Papal and Protestant writers 
are agreed that these theses involved by no means, on 
Luther's part, a conscious renunciation of the Roman 
Catholic doctrine. Luther himself made this manifestly 
clear by his subsequent appeal to the Pope, and also by 
the fact that he was attempting the reformation and not 
the disorganization of the Church. His opposition to 
the corruptions of Rome was but a reflex of public opin- 
ion, which, by this time, had become wide-spread. The 
Pope became alarmed, and was startled, as by an elec- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 43 

trie shock, when he discovered finally that the humble 
and obscure monk, whom he at first feigned to despise, 
had sent an impulse all over the religious world. Im- 
mediate steps were taken to arrest, if possible, the prog- 
ress of Luther's revolutionary movement. At first the 
Pope summoned Luther to Rome; but at the request of 
the University of Wittenberg, and the elector of Sax- 
ony, the concession was made that the Papal legate, 
Thomas de Vio (better known in history as Oajetanus), 
should examine Luther in a paternal and conciliatory 
manner. Luther's characteristic line of defense was 
the rejection of the arguments as taken from the Fath- 
ers and the scholastics, and the demand to be refuted by 
arguments cited from the Bible. After hearing that the 
Pope had issued a fresh Papal bull in behalf of indulg- 
ences, Luther changed his appeal to an ecumenical coun- 
cil. Soon after this the court of Rome found it expedi- 
ent to change its policy with Luther, and to win him 
back by compromise and kindliness. The Papal Cham- 
berlain, Karl Yon Miltitz, a native of Saxony, was so far 
successful that Luther promised to write letters in which 
he would admonish all persons to be obedient and re- 
spectful to the Church of Rome, and to write to the 
Pope to assure him that he had never thought of in- 
fringing upon the rights and privileges of the Mother 
Church. History informs us that the letter was actually 
indited; its language is replete with expressions of con- 
descension, and it exalts the Roman Church above ev- 
ery thing but Christ himself. He also promised to dis- 
continue the controversy if his opponents would agree 
to do the same. But only a brief period elapsed before 
lie was drawn into the Disputation of Leipsic (continu- 
ing from June 27 to July 15, 1519), which the vain glo- 
rified Dr. Eck had originally arranged with Carlstadt. 



44 LUTHER AND THE MAN OF SIN. 

History awards to Dr. Eck the glory of having proved 
himself the more able disputant, but Luther's cause was 
nevertheless greatly benefited by the discussion. The 
arguments of his fiery opponents drove Luther onward 
to a more decided rejection of Romish innovations. 
He was led by degrees to assert boldly that the Pope 
wavS not by divine right the universal Bishop of the 
Church, to entertain doubts of the infallibility of 
councils, and to believe that not all the Hussite 
doctrines w r ere heretical. 

Great men soon came to the support of Luther, and 
among others, Dr. Melancthon, one of the greatest schol- 
ars of the age. The conflict between Rome and Luther 
now became one of life and death. Dr. Eck returned 
from a journey to Rome with a Papal bull, which de- 
clared Luther a heretic, and which ordered the burning 
of his writings. Luther, on the other hand, systema- 
tized his views in three works, all of which appeared in 
1520, viz.: To his Imperial Majesty and the Christian No- 
bility of the German Nation — On the Babylonian Captivity 
of the Church — Sermon on the Freedom of a Christian 
Man. The culmination finally came, when (December 
10, 1520) Luther publicly burnt the Papal bull with the 
Papal canon law. The Pope succeeded in prevailing 
upon the German emperor and the German Diet of 
Worms (1521) to proceed against the great heretic; and 
when Luther firmly refused to recant and persistently 
avowed that he could yield to nothing but the Holy 
Scriptures and sound argument, he was placed under 
the ban of the empire; but so great was the discontent 
in German} 7 with corrupt Rome, that the same assembly 
which condemned Luther for opposing the faith of their 
ancestors, presented 101 articles of complaint against 
the Roman See. As the ban of the empire against 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 46 

Luther imperiled his life, he was persuaded by his 
friends to seclude himself in the Castle of Wartburg. 
Placed beyond the turmoil of political agitation, he 
found time to issue several powerful polemical essays 
against auricular confession, against monastic vows, 
against masses for the dead, and against the new idol of 
the Archbishop of Mentz. After his return from Wart- 
burg, Luther gave his chief attention to the continua- 
tion of his translation of the Bible in German, which 
was completed in 1534, and which was a master produc- 
tion for that age of the world, while Melancthon, in his 
celebrated work on theological science, gave to the the- 
ological leaders of the new order of things a hand-book 
of doctrine. Then came the Augsburg Confession, by 
which every man was to be measured; and, having 
adopted this as the theological measure of every man, 
then the Bible became once more a sealed book, then a 
cessation of Bible investigation, and finally the imposi- 
tion of human dogmas and ecclesiastical contraction, in 
which condition of stagnation the Lutheran Reforma- 
tion has stood ever since, but with an expansion of many 
millions of nominal members, all of whom were made 
members of the Lutheran Church in infancy, without 
faith and knowledge, and without liberty of choice. At 
the Diet of Worms, 1521, before the Augsburg Confes- 
sion was formulated into a creed, when Luther was per- 
emptorily called upon to recant, he replied in Latin: 
"Unless I shall be convinced by the testimonies of the 
Scriptures or by evident reason (for I believe neither 
Pope nor councils alone, since it is manifest they have 
often erred and contradicted themselves), I am bound 
by the Scriptures I have quoted, and my conscience is 
held captive by the Word of God; and as it is neither 
safe nor right to act against conscience, I can not and 



46 LUTHER AND THE MAN OF SIN. 

will not retract anything." He added in Grerman: 
a Here I stand; lean not otherwise; God help me. Amen." 
Memorable words, if only he had adhered to them. 
But subsequently he took an active part in forming the 
constitution of the Consistories. He was, in conjunc- 
tion with other ecclesiastics, the author of the Marburg 
Articles and Schwabach Articles (1529), which furnished 
the basis, and to a large extent, the material, both doc- 
trinal and verbal, of the Augsburg Confession, in 1530, 
during its direct preparation and presentation. During 
his conflicts with the powers of Rome, he exhorted his 
friends not to call themselves Lutherans, but Christians, 
and he also told them that he was not writing his tracts 
to bring them to him, but to bring them to the Bible. 
In dissolving Church and State, and in procuring the 
civil liberties of the German people, as well as the liber- 
ties of the people of other States, the Lutheran Reforma- 
tion accomplished great and lasting good; but, relig- 
iously, as soon as the Augsburg Confession was made to 
occupy the place of the Bible, reformation ceased, and 
there has been but little progress in that direction since. 
Luther never attempted the complete restoration of 
Apostolic Christianity. He never comprehended such a 
question, which is made the more evident by the fact 
that the Augsburg Confession contains doctrines and 
dogmas which are purely of Papal origin, notably the 
dogma of Transubstantiation, on account of which, as 
well as on account of other Romish dogmas, Zwingli 
and other reformers, in Switzerland, separated from him, 
as we shall show in our next article. Though the great 
reformer freed himself from the fetters of Papal ecclesi- 
asticism, and severed his connection with the despotism 
of Rome, it is nevertheless a fact that he never divested 
himself entirely of the mysticism of the dark ages, and 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 47 

never thoroughly rid himself of the traditions of Rome. 
Hence the necessity of succeeding reformatory move- 
ments, not one of which effected a restoration of the 
apostolic order of things, neither in doctrine nor in 
practice, as we shall discover in our future investiga- 
tions. We accept the good that preceding reformers 
have accomplished, and honor those who have rescued 
the Bible from the grasp of a despotic hierarchy, but 
whatever they taught contrary to God's word, we reject. 
What the early reformers left undone, we propose to 
complete; by which we mean an entire restoration of 
the ancient order of things, in faith and practice, in 
doctrine and discipline. 



ORIGIN OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION". 



Having in a previous number given the origin and a 
brief outline of the Lutheran Reformation, we next 
proceed to present a history of the Augsburg Confess- 
ion, which we derive from the most reliable standard 
authorities: 

After Charles V. had concluded a peace with France, 
he summoned a German Diet to meet at Augsburg, 
April 8, 1530. The decree of invitation called for aid 
against the Turks, who, in 1529, had besieged Vienna; 
it also promised a discussion of the religious questions 
of the time, and such a settlement of them as both to 
abolish existing abuses and to satisfy the demands of 
the Pope. Elector John, of Saxony, who received this 
decree, March 11, directed (March 14) Luther, Jonas, 
Bugenhagen and Melancthon to meet in Torgau, and 
draw up a summary of the most important and nec- 
essary articles of faith, in support of which the evan- 
gelical princes and states should combine. These 
theologians, as we shall term them, drew up a profes- 
sion of their faith, the ground-work of which they 
found in the seventeen articles which had been prepared 
by Luther for the convention at Schwalbach, and fifteen 
other articles, which had been drawn up at the theolog- 
ical conference at Marburg, and subsequently presented 
to the Saxon elector John at Torgau. The first draft 
made by the four theologians, in seventeen articles, was 

(48) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 49 

at once published, and elicited a joint reply from 
Wirnpina, Mensing, Redoerfer and Dr. Elgers, which 
Luther immediately answered. The subject of the con- 
troversy had thus become generally known. Luther, 
Jonas and Melancthon were invited by the Saxon 
elector to accompany him to Augsburg. However, 
subsequently, it was deemed best for Luther's safety to 
leave him behind. Melancthon, soon after his arrival 
at Augsburg, completed the Confession, and gave to it 
the title Apologia. On the 11th of May he sent it to 
Luther, who was then at Coburg, and on the 15th of 
May he received from Luther an answer of approval. 
Several alterations were suggested to Melancthon in his 
conference with Jonas, the Saxon Chancellor Brttck, the 
conciliatory Bishop Stadion of Augsburg, and the Im- 
perial Secretary Valdes. To the latter, upon his re- 
quest, seventeen articles were handed by Melancthon, 
with the consent of the Saxon elector, and he was to 
have a preliminary discussion concerning them with 
the Papal legate Pimpinelli. Upon the opening of the 
Diet, June 20, the so-called evangelical theologians who 
were present — Melancthon, Jonas, Agricola, Brenz, 
Schnepf and others — presented the Confession to the 
elector. The latter, on June 23, had it signed by the 
evangelical princes and representatives of cities who 
were present, viz: John, elector of Saxony; Gerge, 
margrave of Brandenburg; Enerst, duke of Lunenburg; 
Philip, landgrave of Hesse; John Frederick, duke of 
Saxe; Francis, duke of Lunenburg; Wolfgang, prince 
of Anhalt; and the magistrates of Nuremberg and 
Reutlinger. 

The emperor had ordered the Confession to be pre- 
sented to him at the next session, June 24; but when 
the evangelical princes asked for permission to read it, 
5 



50 ORIGIN OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 

their petition was refused, and efforts were made to pre- 
vent the puhlic reading of the document altogether. 
The evangelical princes declared, however, that they 
would not part with the Confession until its reading 
should be allowed. The 25th of the month was then 
fixed as the day of its presentation. In order to exclude 
the people, the little chapel of the Episcopal Palace was 
appointed in the place of the spacious City Hall, where 
the meetings of the Diet were held. In this chapel the 
Protestant princes assembled on the appointed day, 
June 25, 1530. The Saxon Chancellor Briick, held in 
his hands the Latin, Dr. Christian Bayer, the German 
copy. They stepped into the middle of the august as- 
sembly, and all the Protestant princes rose from their 
seats, but were instantly commanded to sit down. The 
emperor wished to hear the Latin copy read first, but 
the elector replied that they were on German ground : 
whereupon the emperor consented to the reading of the 
German copy, which was done by Dr. Bayer. The 
reading lasted from four to six o'clock. The reading 
being completed, the emperor ordered both copies to be 
given to him. The German copy he handed to the 
Archbishop of Mayence, the Latin he carried with him 
to Brussels. Neither of these copies is now extant. 
The emperor promised to take this " highly important 
matter" into serious consideration, and make known 
his decision; in the meanwhile the Confession was not 
to be printed without imperial permission. The Prot- 
estant princes promised to comply with this wish; but 
when, soon after the reading, an erroneous edition of 
the Confession appeared, it became necessary to have 
both the German and the Latin texts published, which 
work was done through Melancthon. On June 27 the 
Confession was given, in the presence of the whole as- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 51 

sembly, to the Roman Catholic theologians to be re- 
futed. The most prominent among them were Eck, 
Faber, Wimpina, Cochlaeus and Dietenberger. Before 
they got through with their work a letter was received 
from Erasmus, who had been asked for his opinion by 
Cardinal Campegius, recommending caution, and the 
concession of the Protestant demands concerning the 
marriage of the priests, monastic vows and the Lord's 
Supper. 

On July 12 the Roman Catholic "Confutation" was 
presented, which so displeased the emperor that "of 
280 leaves, only 12 remained whole." A new "Confu- 
tation" was therefore prepared and read to the Diet, 
August 3, by the imperial secretary Schweiss. No 
copy of it was given to the ' ' evangelical members" of 
the Diet, and it was not published until 1573, by 
Fabricius. Immediately after the reading of the Con- 
futation, the Protestants were commanded to conform to 
it. Negotiations for effecting a compromise were begun 
by both parties, but led to no practical result. Nego- 
tiations between the Lutherans and the Zwinglians 
were equally fruitless. Zwinglias — anglicized Zwingle 
— had sent to the emperor a memorial, dated July 4, 
and Bucer, Capito and Hedio had drawn up, in the 
name of the cities of Strausburg, Constance, Memmin- 
gen and Lindau, the Confessio Tetrapolitana, which was 
presented to the emperor July 11. Neither of these 
two Confessions was read, and both were rejected. 

Melancthon, at the request of the "evangelical princes" 
and cities, prepared an "Apology of the Confession" in 
opposition to the Roman Catholic "Confutation," which 
was presented by the Chancellor Brack, September 22, 
to the emperor, who refused to receive it. Subsequently 
Melancthon received a copy of the "Confutation," 



52 ORIGIN OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 

which led to many alterations in the first draft of the 
Apology. It was then published in Latin, and in a 
German translation by Jonas (Wittenberg, 1531). A 
controversy subsequently arose, in consequence of 
which Melancthon, after 1540, made considerable alter- 
ations in the original Augsburg Confession, altering, 
especially in Article X., the statement of the doctrine 
of the Lord's Supper in favor of the view of the Re- 
formers. Melancthon, who had already been charged 
with "crypto-Calvinism" (concealed Calvinism), was 
severely attacked on account of these alterations; yet 
the " Confessio Variata" remained in the ascendency 
until 1580, when the Confessio Invariata was put into 
the " Concordienbuch" in its place, and thus the unal- 
tered Confession has come to be generally regarded as 
the standard of the Lutheran churehes. It is but just 
to say, however, that the altered Confession has not 
ceased to find advocates, and several branches of the 
Lutheran Church have even abrogated the authorita- 
tive character of the Confession, and do not demand 
from their clergy a belief in all its doctrines. 

And this is how the Augsburg Confession struggled 
into existence. The following table of the contents of 
the Confession and of the Apology will give the reader 
an idea of a religious system of things that, at this time, 
probably wields an influence, directly and indirectly, 
over 40,000,000 people. 

Part I. 1. Acknowledges four oecumenical councils: 
2. Declares original sin to consist wholly in concupis- 
cence: 3. Contains the substance of the Apostles' 
Creed: 4. Declares that justification is the effect of 
faith, exclusive of good works: 5. Declares the word 
of Grod and the sacraments to be the means of convey- 
ing the Holy Spirit, but never without faith: 6. That 
faith must produce good works purely in obedience to 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 53 

God, and not in order to the meriting justification : 7. 
The true church consists of the godly only : 8. Allows 
the validity of the sacraments, though administered by 
the evil one; 9. Declares the necessity of infant bap- 
tism: 10. Declares the real presence in the Eucharist 
continued with the elements only during the period of 
receiving: 11. Declares absolution to be necessary, but 
not so particular confession : 12. Declares against the 
Anabaptists: 13. Requires actual faith in all who re- 
ceive the sacraments: 14. Forbids to teach in the 
church, or to administer the sacraments, without being 
lawfully called: 15. Orders the observance of the holy 
days and ceremonies of the church : 16. Of civil mat- 
ters and marriage: 17. Of the resurrection, last judg- 
ment, heaven and hell: 18. Of free will: 19. That 
God is not the author of sin: 20. That good works 
are not altogether unprofitable: 21. Forbids the invo- 
cation of saints. 

Part II. 1. Enjoins communion in both kinds, and 
forbids the procession of the holy sacrament: 2. Con- 
demns the law of celibacy of priests : 3. Condemns pri- 
vate masses, and enjoins that some of the congregation 
shall communicate with the priest: 4. Against the 
necessity of auricular confession: 5. Against tradition 
and human ceremonies: 6. Condemns monastic vows: 
7. Discriminates between civil and religious power, and 
declares the power of the church to consist only in 
preaching and administering the sacraments. 

These are briefly the facts which show the origin, 
gestation and birth of the Augsburg Confession. The 
intelligent Bible reader can easily tell how much of this 
theological medley is Papal, how much Protestant, how 
much tradition, how much human speculation, and how 
much apostolic teaching. To say nothing of the sinful- 
ness of making the creed, many ot its doctrines are pos- 
itive contradictions of the word of God, and wholly 
subversive of Bible teaching. The reader will have 
noticed, in the history of the Confession just given, 



54 ORIGIN OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 

that civil rulers had about as much to do in producing 
the creed as the reformers themselves. The formation 
of this Augsburg Confession cut off all further investi- 
gation of the Scriptures, and forever stereotyped the 
faith of its adherents. By the doctrines of this Confes- 
sion it will be seen that Luther remained partly a 
Roman Catholic as long as he lived, and it was because 
of this fact that Zwingle, as we shall see further on, 
with other reformers in Switzerland, separated from 
Luther, and framed another confession in harmony 
with their belief. Creedism, as the reader will have 
perceived, began at the very point Where reformation 
ceased. And hence as long as creeds exist, and as long 
as men prefer creeds in lieu of the word of God, there 
can be no Christian union upon the basis of the Script- 
ures, so far as creed lovers are concerned. 



REFORMATION IN SWITZERLAND. 



Ulricii Zwingle was the founder of Protestantism in 
Switzerland. He was a man of fine education and of 
extensive learning. He was educated in the Roman 
Catholic Church. He possessed a bright intellect, was 
a great lover of literature, was early in life distinguished 
for his love of truth, and devoted himself intensely to 
an investigation of the Scriptures. Like Luther, wit- 
nessing the corruptions of the clergy, and discovering 
dogmas and traditions not found in the Word of God, 
such as the worship of the Virgin Mary and the hideous 
doctrine of indulgences, he attempted a work of reform 
in the bosom of the Church. He was soon charged 
with preaching heresy, which the Papal powers re- 
garded as subversive of the established order of things. 
In a conference held at Zurich, called at his own request, 
January 29, 1523, in the presence of an assembly of 
more than six hundred men, he defended sixty-seven 
propositions, which were leveled against the system of 
Romanism. In his defense against the charge of heresy, 
he substituted the authority of the gospel for the au- 
thority of the Church ; he declared the Church to be 
the communion of the faithful, who have no head but 
Christ; he maintained that salvation is through faith in 
Christ as the only priest and intercessor; he rejected the 
Papacy and the mass, the invocation of saints, justifica- 
tion by works, fasts, festivals, pilgrimages, monastic 



56 REFORMATION IN SWITZERLAND. 

orders and the priesthood, auricular confession, absolu- 
tion, indulgences, penances, purgatory and indeed all 
the characteristic peculiarities of the Romish Church. 
In another disputation, before a much larger assembly, 
on the 26th of October following, he obtained a decree 
of the council against the use of images and the sacrifice 
of the mass. 

By these statements it will be seen that Zwingle, as a 
clear-headed reformer, and as one capable of making 
clean-cut distinctions between the teaching of the Bible 
and the Traditions of Rome, was in advance of Luther. 
In 1525, he published his chief work, entitled a " Com- 
mentary on True and False Religion," and also a treatise 
on original sin. The tenets he published are subtantially 
the same as those adopted by the Protestant Churches 
generally. In his philosophy he was a predestinarian 
of an extreme type, transcending both Augustine and 
Calvin. He did not confine the illumination of the 
Spirit within the circle of revealed religion, nor do his 
adherents of the present age, or to those who receive 
the word of God and the "sacraments." He held that 
the virtues of heathen sages and heroes are dne to the 
presence of divine grace, and asserted, for example, that 
Socrates was more pious and holy than all Dominicans 
and Franciscans. "He had busied himself," says 
Neander, "with the study of antiquity, for which he 
had a predilection, and had not the right criterion for 
distinguishing the ethical standing-point of Christianity 
from that of the ancients." From Zurich the Reforma- 
tion spread, and in a short time Zwingle found in 
(Ecolampadius as great a counselor and leader, as 
Luther had found in the distinguished and scholarly 
Melancthon. The authority of the Papal system never 
had the same deep-set hold upon Zwingle as it had upon 



REFORMA.TOBY MOVEMENTS. 57 

Luther, a question, however, which is not necessary to 
discuss here, as we are only aiming to present a histori- 
cal connection of things and events. When Luther was 
put under the ban of the Church, Zwingle, as we learn 
from Ranke, the German historian, was still the recipient 
of a pension from the Pope. When Luther at the Diet 
of Worms, in the face of Papal princes and the legates 
of Rome, refused to submit to the authority of the Pope, 
Zwingle had not yet been seriously molested. As late as 
1523 he received a complimentary letter from Pope 
Adrian VI. — facts which go to show that the reforma- 
tions effected in the sixteenth century were only partial, 
and of course incomplete, and a fact which we desire 
our contemporaries to understand, in view of the work 
in which we are engaged. 

Finally there broke out the great controversy on the 
dogma of T ran substantiation between the Lutheran and 
Swiss reformers. Luther did not obtain this dogma 
from the apostolic record, but from theologians of the 
Latin Church — from Radbert, of the ninth century, from 
the leading schoolmen of the thirteenth century, w T hich 
was made an article of faith by the fourth Lateran 
Council, in 1215, under Innocent III. The reformers, as 
a class, with one consent, denied this dogma, " together 
with the associated doctrine of the sacrificial character 
of the Eucharist." But Luther stoutly affirmed the 
actual, corporate presence of the glorified body and 
blood of Christ, in connection with the bread and wine, 
so that the body and blood, in some mysterious way, are 
received by the communicant, whether he be a believer 
or an unbeliever. Luther did not hold that the heavenly 
body of Christ, which is offered and received in the 
" sacrament," occupies space; yet it is received by all 
who partake of the bread and wine — not a portion of 



58 REFORMATION IN SWITZKR'.AND. 

the body, but the entire Christ by each communicant. 
It is received, in some proper sense, with tiio mouth. 
We have quoted from De Wette, with the German be- 
fore us. Zwingle denied that the body of Christ is 
present, in any sense, in the "sacrament," but, with his 
followers, he was more and more disposed to attach im- 
portance to a spiritual presence in the institution. This 
belief Calvin emphasized and added the positive asser- 
tion of a direct influence upon the believing communi- 
cant, which flows from Christ through the medium or 
instrumentality of his human nature. "The Word and 
the Sacraments Luther had made the criteria of the 
Church. On upholding them in their just place, every- 
thing that distinguished his reform from enthusiasm or 
rationalism depended. He had never thought of for- 
saking the dogmatic system of Latiu Christianity in its 
earlier and purer days, and he looked with alarm on 
what struck him as a rationalistic innovation.'' At the 
Conference of Marburg, in 1529, which was called with 
a view of reconciling the disaffected parties, when the 
theologians sat by a table, the Saxons on one side and 
Swiss on the opposite side, Luther wrote upon the table 
with chalk his text: " Hoc est meum corpus" (this is 
my body), and resolutely refused to budge an iota from 
the literal sense. 



ORIGIN OF THE HEIDELBERG CONFESSION". 



As a result of the controversy between the Lutheran 
reformers and the Swiss reformers, we have the Heidel- 
berg Catechism, the property of the Reformed Church. 
Its name is derived from the city in which it was 
compiled and first printed. It is also sometimes styled 
the Palatinate Catechism, from the territory (the Palati- 
nate) of the Prince (Frederick III.) under whose auspices 
it was prepared. Soon after the introduction of Prot- 
estantism into the Palatinate in 1546, the controversy 
between Lutherans and Calvinists broke out, and for 
years, especially under the Elector Otto Heinrich (1556- 
59), it raged with great violence in Heidelberg. Fred- 
erick III. who came into power in 1559, adopted the 
Calvinistic view of the Lord's Supper, and favored that 
side of the question with all his princely power. He 
reorganized the Sapienz College (founded by his pre- 
decessor) as a theological school, and placed at its head 
(1562) Zacharias Ursinus, a pupil and friend of 
Melancthon, who had adopted the Reformed opinions. 
In order to put an end to religious disputes in his 
dominions, he determined to put forth a Catechism, a 
Confession of Faith, and laid the responsibility of 
preparing it upon Ursinus and Caspar Olevianus, for a 
time professor in the University of Heidelberg, then 
court-preacher to Frederick III. They made use of 
the catechetical literature then in existence, especially 

(59) 



60 OKIGIN OF THE HEIDELBERG CONFESSION. 

of the catechisms of Calvin and John a Lasco. Each 
prepared sketches or drafts, and "the final preparation 
was the work of both these theologians, with the constant 
co-operation of Frederick III. Ursinns has always been 
regarded as the chief author, as he was afterwards the 
principal defender and interpreter of the Catechism; 
still, it would appear that the nervous German style, the 
division into three parts (as distinguished from the five 
parts in the Catechism of Calvin, and the previous draft 
of Ursinus , and the genial warmth and unction of the 
whole work, are chiefly due to Olevianus." (Schaff', in 
Am. Pres. Rev. July, 1863, p. 379.) Philip Schaff, of 
New York, is the acknowledged leader of the Reformed 
Church in America. When the Catechism was com- 
pleted, Frederick laid it before a synod of the superin- 
tendents of the Palatinate, December, 1562, and after a 
careful examination it was duly approved. Dr. Schaff 
observes, in the same Review from which we have already 
quoted, that "the Catechism is a true expression of the 
convictions of its authors, but it communicates only so 
much of these as is in harmony with the public faith of 
the Church, and observes a certain reticence or reserva- 
tion and moderation on such doctrines (as the twofold 
predestination), which belong rather to scientific theology 
and private conviction than to a public Church confession 
and the instruction of youth." 

The Heidelberg Catechism contains substantially the 
same tenets, dogmas, traditions, speculations and private 
opinions that are found in all Protestant creeds, except 
in governmental affairs. In common with all creeds, 
whether Romanist or Protestant, it teaches infant baptism 
and sprinkling. The body of people which it represents, 
is called the Reformed Church, and this Reformed 
Church is regarded by its theologians and admirers as a 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 61 

decided improvement upon the Lutheran Church; that 
is to say, there is not as much Romanism in the Heidel- 
berg Catechism as there is in the Augsburg Confession. 
The theologians and princes of Germany and Switzerland 
began reformation with the Bible, and ended their work 
by the substitution of Creeds — Confessions of Faith — 
Symbols of Faith — Church Standards, etc. Taking the 
Bible as their guide, they beat a retreat from the mystic 
realms of Papal Babylon, but had not gone far until the 
leaders commanded a halt, when they went to work, 
while still under the potent influence of Home, and 
formulated Confessions of Faith; and, wedded to these 
human inventions, as their supporters now are, they 
still dwell within the confines of old Babylon. If 
not ecclesiastically under the power of the " Mother 
Church," they are religiously and spiritually of the same 
affinities. None of these creeds, whether Catholic or 
Protestant, tells a man how to become a Christian. They 
tell a man how he may become a Catholic, a Lutheran, 
a Reformer, an Episcopalian, a Presbyterian, a Methodist, 
a Baptist, perchance. There is not a Confession of Faith 
in existence that ever saved a soul. As human com- 
positions, one is just as full of light and knowledge as 
another, and just as efficacious in the salvation of the 
soul. They all originated in the councils of men; they 
were digested in the heat of human passions; they were 
concocted and planned by envious and rival theologians; 
they became the symbols — the insignia — of rival princes; 
they have always engendered strife, hatred, malice, 
bigotry, intolerance and persecution, and will continue 
to do so until the end of time. There is no Christian 
love in them; there is nothing in them that will unite 
the people of God, and make them one people. The 
mind of God is not found in them, and the spirit of 



62 ORIGIN OF THE HEIDELBERG CONFESSION. 

Christ does not breathe through them. They confuse 
the human mind; they divide the counsels of Christians ; 
they paralyze the power of truth ; they make a fable of 
the gospel; they mock the prayers of the Savior; they 
make void the law of God; they infuse the spirit of 
sectarianism; they cramp the human intellect; they place 
insuperable barriers between those seeking love and 
unity upon the basis of the Bible. 

In view of these facts, and many more yet to be pro- 
duced, let our brethren understand that our mission is 
not yet ended, but, on the contrary, only fairly begun. 
We have no human creed to defend. The Bible, and 
the Bible only, is our rule of faith and practice. The 
word of God only is the man of our counsel. All creeds 
must be crushed under the weight of divine authority. 
"The unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace," must 
destroy all sectism. There must be but one fold and 
one Shepherd. We are set for the defense of the gospel 
of the Son of God, and we propose to walk in the old 
paths. We propose the restoration of the apostolic 
order of things. To this work we consecrate our life's 
blood. Upon this altar we lay our all. We trust that 
all those who have been called into this marvelous light, 
will stand firm, and work, and contend for the faith, 
and show themselves men in the highest sense of the 
word, and never, never, yield an iota of the truth. 



JOHN CALVIN AND CALVINISM. 



It is not our purpose, nor is it necessary to the end 
we Have in view, to trace the Lutheran Reformation as 
it spread all through the Scandinavian kingdom, pene- 
trated the Slavonic nations, and took Hungary captive. 
We shall next have something to say about John Calvin 
and his theology. 

In French Switzerland, the reformatory movement 
began in 1526, in the French parts of the cantons Berne 
and Biel, where the principles of reform were preached 
by William Farel, a native of France. In 1530, he es- 
tablished the Reformation in Neufchatel. A beginning 
was made in Geneva as early as 1528; in 1534, after a 
religious conference held at the suggestion of the people 
of Berne, in which Farel defended the Reformation, 
public worship was granted to those who belonged to 
the Reformed branch; rapid progress was then made 
through the zeal of Farel, Froment and Viret; and in 
1535, after another disputation, the Papacy was abol- 
ished by the council and the doctrines of the Reforma- 
tion adopted. In 1536 John Calvin arrived in Geneva, 
and was induced by Farel to remain in the city and to 
aid him in his struggle against a party of free thinkers, 
who called themselves Spirituals. In October of the 
same year he took part with Farel and Viret in a relig- 
ious disputation held at Lausanne, which resulted in 
gaining over the Pays-de-Vaud to the cause of the 

(63) 



64 JOHN CALVIN AND CALVINISM. 

Reformation. In 1538 both Farel and Calvin were 
banished by the council, which had taken offense at the 
very strict Church discipline introduced by the reform- 
ers. Soon, however, the friends of the Reformation re- 
gained the ascendency, and Calvin was recalled in 1541, 
while Farel remained in Neufchatel. For several years 
Calvin was put under the necessity of sustaining a des- 
perate struggle against his opponents, but in 1555 they 
were finally subdued in an insurrection incited by one 
Ami Perrin. From that time forward the reformatory 
ideas of Calvin were carried through in both Church 
and State with a consistency as rigid as iron, and 
Geneva became a center whence reformatory influences 
spread to the remotest parts of Europe. By an exten- 
sive correspondence and numerous theological theses, 
he exerted a powerful personal influence upon a certain 
class of mind far beyond the boundaries of Switzerland. 
The theological academy of Geneva, founded in 1588, 
supplied the churches of many foreign countries, espe- 
cially France, with preachers trained in the spirit of 
Calvin. When Calvin died, in 1564, the continuation 
of his work devolved upon the learned Theodore Beza. 
Calvin disagreed in many points with Zwingle, whose 
views gradually lost ground as those of Calvin ad- 
vanced. The Second Helvetic Confession, the most im- 
portant among the symbolical books of the Reformed 
Church, which was compiled by Bullinger in Zurich, 
published in 1566, and recognized in all Reformed 
countries, completed, we are told, the superiority of 
Calvin's reformatory notions over those of Zwingle. 

Calvin was only eight years old when Luther posted 
his famous theses upon the door of the Cathedral in 
"Wittenberg. He was born at Noyon, in Picardy, on 
the 10th of July, 1509. He was well provided for by 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 65 

families of nobility, who assisted him in obtaining a 
splendid education in the best colleges of Paris. His 
physical constitution was not strong, but early in life he 
developed extraordinary intellectual power. He was 
raised in affluence, and was never subjected to penury 
and rougb discipline, as were the German and Swiss re- 
formers. In college he surpassed his companions in 
severe mental application, and in a natural aptitude to 
learn. He spent most of his time by himself, and from 
his serious and severe turn of mind, he was nicknamed 
by his companions, "The Accusative Case." At the 
age of eighteen he received the tonsure, and preached 
occasionally, but had not taken orders, as his father, 
changing his plan, concluded to qualify him for the 
profession of a jurist. He studied under the most cele- 
brated teachers. Before long, however, his attention 
was directed to the study of the Scriptures through the 
influence of Protestant relatives. Little is known of 
his public career until about 1532, soon after which he 
gives an account of his "sudden conversion." "Calvin 
had hesitated about becoming a Protestant, out of rev- 
erence for the Church. But he so modified his concep- 
tion of the Church as to perceive that the change did 
not involve a renunciation of it. Membership in the 
true Church was consistent with renouncing the rule of 
the Roman Catholic prelacy; for the Church, in its 
essence invisible, exists in a true form wherever the 
gospel is faithfully preached and the sacraments admin- 
istered conformably to the directions of Christ." So 
says George P. Fisher, D. D., in his History of the Ref- 
ormation, p. 195-6. 

Calvin, by his great learning, by the rare acuteness 
of his intellect, and by his extensive acquaintance with 
the contents of the Bible, became an acknowledged 
6 



66 JOHN CALVIN AND CALVINISM. 

leader of the Protestant party in France. Speaking of 
Calvin's characteristics as a writer and a man, Prof. 
Fisher says: "His direct influence was predominantly 
and almost exclusively upon the higher classes of soci- 
ety. He and his system acted powerfully upon the 
people, but indirectly through the agency of others. 
He was a patrician in his temperament. By his early 
associations, and as an effect of his culture, he acquired 
a certain refinement and decided affinities for the class 
elevated by birth or education. This was one of his 
points of dissimilarity to Luther: he was not fitted, 
like the German reformer, to come home to the 'busi- 
ness and bosoms' of common men. He had not the 
popular eloquence of Luther, nor had he the genius 
that left its impress on the words and works of the 
Saxon reformer; but he was a more exact and finished 
scholar than Luther." Melancthon greeted Calvin as 
" the theologian," and by the enemies of Protestantism 
his work was styled "the Koran of the heretics." A 
contemporary writer thus spoke of him : 

"Some think on Calvin heaven's own mantle fell, 
While others deemed him an instrument of hell." 

Professedly he adopted the Bible as the sole standard 
of doctrine, while at the same time he made his peculiar 
speculation of Predestination to overshadow the whole 
Bible, and to render nugatory the revealed plan of sal- 
vation. While his "Institutes" show him to be a very 
acute critic and a profound exegetical writer, yet at the 
same time it is apparent that by his theocratic interpre- 
tations of Scripture he renders the gospel of Christ a 
myth. While he scouts the doctrine that the truth of 
the Bible rests on the authority of the Church, and 
holds that the divine authority of the Bible can be es- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 67 

tablished by reason, he at the same time maintains that 
a spiritual insight of gospel truth is imparted directly 
by the Holy Spirit. While he professes little esteem 
for the fathers of the Church, and while he stigmatizes 
the dogmas and rites of the Papacy as the u impious in- 
ventions of men," without warrant from the Word of 
God, yet at the same time, unlike the other reformers, 
he frequently pays deference to the Church. Believing 
in a Church Invisible, composed of true believers, and 
also believing in the Church Visible, the criteria of which 
are the proper administration of the Sacraments and 
the teaching of the Word, and theoretically demanding 
positive submission to the model of the New Testament, 
he at the same time fails to identify the apostolic Church 
in its complete restoration and purity. The smell of the 
Papacy tinges much of his writings. Prof. Fisher thus 
summarizes the peculiar theological tenets of Calvin: 

Predestination to him is the correlate of human 
dependence; the counterpart of the doctrine of grace; 
the antithesis to salvation by merit; the implied con- 
sequences of man's complete bondage to sin. In election, 
it is involved that man's salvation is not his own work, 
but, wholly, the work of the grace of God; and in 
election, also, there is laid a sure foundation for the 
believer's security under all the assaults of temptation. 
It is practical interest which Calvin is sedulous to guard; 
he clings to the doctrine for what he considers its relig- 
ious value; and it is no more than justice to him to 
remember that he habitually styles the tenet, which 
proved to be so obnoxious, an unfathomable mystery, 
an abyss into which no mortal mind can descend. And, 
whether consistently or not, there is the most earnest 
assertion of the moral and responsible nature of man. 
Augustine held that in the fall of Adam, the entire 
race were involved in a common act and a common 
catastrophe. The will is not destroyed ; it is still free 
to sin, but is utterly disabled as regards holiness. Out 



68 JOHN CALVIN AND CALVINISM. 

of the mass of mankind, all of whom are alike guilty, 
God chooses a part to be the recipients of his mercy, 
whom he purines by an irresistible influence, but leaves 
the rest to suffer the penalty which they have justly 
brought upon themselves. In the "Institutes," Calvin 
does what Luther had done in his book against Eras 
mus; he makes the Fall itself, the primal transgression, 
the object of an efficient decree. In this particular h« 
goes beyond Augustine, and apparently affords a sanc- 
tion to the extreme, or supralapsarian type of theology, 
which afterwards found numerous defenders — which 
traces sin to the direct agency of God, and even founds 
the distinction of right and wrong ultimately on his 
omnipotent will. [Inst. 3, xxiii. 6, seq.] But when 
Calvin was called upon to define his doctrine more care- 
fully, as in the Consensus Genevensis, he confines himself 
to the assertion of a permissive decree — a volitive 
permission — in the case of the first sin. In other 
words, he does not overstep the Augustinian position. 
He explicitly avers that every decree of the Almighty 
springs from reasons which, though hidden from us, 
are good and sufficient; that is to say, he founds will 
upon right, and not right upon will. He differs, how- 
ever, both from Augustine and Luther, in affirming that 
none who are once converted fall from a state of grace, 
the number of believers being coextensive with the 
number of the elect. 

Calvin lives in history as a scholar and a theologian, 
but not as a reformer. He rendered valuable service as 
an interpreter and expounder of Scriptures, but, like 
Luther, Zwingle and Knox, he failed to restore the 
primitive apostolic order of things. His speculations, , 
theologically known as Predestination, Total Hereditary 
Depravity, Particular Election, Reprobation, Final Per- 
severance and the Eternal Decrees, have only served the 
purpose of dividing the people of God instead of uniting 
them — have only perplexed and confused the human 
mind instead of making plain the simplicity of the 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 69 

gospel. It is said of Calvin by his biographers, that at 
times he was so carried away by gusts of passion, that 
he lost all self-control. He had tried in vain, he says, 
to "tame the wild beast of his anger;" and on his 
death-bed he asked pardon of the Senate of Geneva for 
outbursts of passion, while at the same time he thanked 
them for their forbearance. 

Calvin, by instinct and choice, was better fitted for 
the rigid Theocracy of Moses than for the liberty of the 
gospel. He had a stronger inclination toward Mosaic 
legislation than toward a system of divine truth which 
makes the individual free. He ruled with a rod of iron 
in the city of Geneva, where he directed civil as well as 
ecclesiastical affairs. "In 1568, under the stern code 
which was established under the auspices of Calvin, a 
child was beheaded for striking its father and mother. 
A child sixteen years old, for attempting to strike its 
mother, was sentenced to death; but, on account of its 
youth, the sentence was commuted, and having been 
publicly whipped, with a cord about its neck, it was 
banished from the citv. In 1565 a woman was chastised 
with rods for singing songs to the melody of the Psalms." 
And other inflictions are recorded too numerous to 
mention. The expulsion of Castellio from Geneva, a 
highly cultivated scholar whom Calvin had brought 
from Strasburg, to take charge of the Geneva school — 
an expulsion caused by the influence of Calvin himself 
— and the death of Servetus, instigated bv Calvin, and 
executed by those directly under his influence, because 
Servetus wrote a book entitled "Errors of the Trinity," 
which contradicted the opinions of Calvin, — these heart- 
less acts indicate the temper of Calvin's spirit, these 
show the character of his cold intellect, these demonstrate 
the rigidity and inflexibility of his will power. The 



70 JOHN CALVIN AND CALVINISM. 

powerful intellect of such a man may excite the admi- 
ration of cold-hearted theologians, and overawe the 
ignorant and superstitious with amazement, but such a 
disposition can never command the love and affection 
of the " common people." In our opinion, there is 
nothing in Calvinism but the defeat of Christianity — 
there is nothing in it on which a sinful and helpless 
world can lean for support. There is not a gleam of 
hope in it. It is a death-dealing system. 






ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 



We headed this series of articles Reformatory Move- 
ments. It may become evident before we conclude, that 
this series should have been designated A History of the 
Protestant Denominations, for the reason that many of 
them do not contain the elements of religious reforma- 
tion at all. 

The principles of the Lutheran Reformation swept 
across the English Channel, and seized the people of 
the British Empire. But, as might have been expected, 
the heresies of Luther and of Wycliffe met with intense 
and malicious opposition from the start. King Henry 
VIII., at the outbreak of the politico-religious revolu- 
tion, became a conspicuous opponent of Luther, as well 
as a champion of the Papal cause. For writing a 
polemical book against Luther upon the Seven Sac- 
raments, Leo X. conferred upon the King the title 
"Defender of the Faith" (Defensor Fidei). This took 
place in 1521. Henry also addressed a letter to the 
emperor of Germany, in which he demanded the extir- 
pation of the heretics. But the doctrines of Luther 
found ardent adherents even at the English universities, 
and an English translation of the Bible, by Frith and 
Tyndale, members of the University of Cambridge, 
produced a decisive and salutary effect. It was not 
long, however, until King Henry had a quarrel with 
the Pope, because the latter refused to annul TTcnrv's 

(71) 



72 ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 

marriage with Catharine, of Aragon, the niece of the 
Emperor Charles V. Henry, who represented that his 
marriage with Catharine, his brother's widow, was 
open to objections, laid the matter, by advice of 
Thomas Cranmer, before the universities of Europe, 
"not abstaining, however, from the use of bribery 
abroad, and of menaces at home;" but when replies 
came back declaring the marriage with a brother's wife 
null and void, the King separated from Catharine, mar- 
ried Anne Boleyn, and, as a consequence, fell under the 
Papal ban. 

Through the conniving of Henry, the English Parlia- 
ment was induced to sunder the connection between 
England and Rome, and to recognize the King as head 
01 the new Church. It became the fixed purpose of 
Henry to destroy, if possible, the influence of the Pope 
over the Church of England, with a desire at the same 
time to preserve its Catholic character. As a revenge 
upon the Pope, he subjected the cloisters to a searching 
investigation in 1535, and in the following year he 
totally abolished them. In 1538, the Bible was diflnsed 
in the mother tongue as the only source of doctrine; 
"but the statute of 1539 imposed distinct limits upon 
the Reformation, and, in particular, confirmed transub- 
stantiation, priestly celibacy, masses for the dead, and 
auricular confession." After the Pope's authority was 
abolished in England, Parliament passed the Act of 
Supremacy, "That the King, our sovereign lord, his 
heirs and successors, Kings of this realm, shall be 
taken, accepted, and reputed the only supreme head in 
earth of the Church of England, called the Anglicana 
Ecclesia." 

And this was the origin of the Episcopal Church! 
Up to this memorable event, the Pope of Rome was 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 73 

recognized as head of the Church of England: now 
Henry VIII. becomes head of the Church, and the 
ecclesiastical are brought into subjection to the civil 
powers. Many of those who refused to submit to the 
new order of things in England, were executed, and 
their goods confiscated by the loyal but servile minions 
of the English King. It is evident that while Henry 
was a Protestant in form, he was a Romanist in heart. 
A powerful party, headed by Thomas Cranmer, after- 
wards Archbishop of Canterbury, and Thomas Cromwell, 
royal vicar-general in ecclesiastical affairs, exerted a 
silent influence towards the Reformed churches of con- 
tinental Europe. They met with little success during 
the reign of Henry, but gained a temporary ascendency 
in the regency which ruled England during the minor- 
ity of Edward VI. Certain parties, including Peter 
Martyr, Bucer and Fagius, were invited to England to 
aid Cranmer in establishing the Reformation. The 
basis was laid in the Book of Homilies (1547), the new 
English Liturgy (the Book of Common Prayer, 1548), 
and the Forty-two Articles, 1552; but the labors of 
Cranmer were interrupted by the death of Edward VI. 
in 1553. His successor, Queen Mary, the daughter of 
Henry and Catharine of Aragon, was, as the intelligent 
reader knows, a devoted partisan of the Church of 
Rome, during whose bloody reign Cranmer and from 
three hundred to four hundred other persons were exe- 
cuted on account of their religious views. A Papal 
nuncio appeared in England, and an obsequious Parlia- 
ment sanctioned the reunion with Rome; but the 
affections of the people were not regained, and the 
early death of Mary, in 1558, put an end to the official 
restoration of the Papal Church. Queen Elizabeth, the 
daughter of Henry and Anne Boleyn, whose birth, in 
7 



74 ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH OF E1NCLA1ND. 

consequence of the Papal decision, was regarded by the 
Roman Catholics as illegitimate, resumed the work of 
her father, and completed the English Reformation, as 
a work distinct both from the Church of Rome and the 
Reformation of Germany aud (Switzerland. 



THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES. 



The Book of Common Prayer, which had been 
adopted under Edward VI., was so changed as to be 
less offensive to the Romish party; and by the Act of 
Uniformity, June, 1559, it was made binding on all the 
churches of the kingdom. Most of the subjects of the 
Pope conformed. The Confession of Faith, which had 
been formulated under Edward, in forty-two articles, 
was reduced to Thirty-nine Articles, and in this form it 
was adopted by a convocation of the clergy, at London, 
in 1562, and by Parliament made, in 1571, the rule of 
faith for all the clergy of the realm. According to the 
Thirty-nine Articles, the Scriptures contain, so they tell 
us, everything necessary to salvation. We are further 
informed that justification is through faith alone, which 
Article, we presume, was intended as an offset to the 
Romish doctrine of justification by works alone, or the 
doctrine of indulgences; but works acceptable to God 
are the necessary fruit of this faith. Of course, neither 
Christ nor his apostles were consulted, when the English 
Parliament declared that supreme power over the Church 
is vested in the English crown, though limited by the 
statutes. Bishops continued to be the highest ecclesias- 
tical officers and the first barons of the realm, which, it 
must be confessed, does not resemble the simplicity of 
the primitive order. Subscription to the Articles was 
made binding on the clergy ; freedom of conscience was 

(75) 



76 THE THIRTY NINE ARTICLES. 

granted to the laity. The adoption of the Thirty-nine 
Articles completed, substantially, the constitution of 
the Episcopal Church of England. Some parts of the 
Church government and the Liturgy, especially the re- 
taining of sacerdotal vestments, gave great offense to a 
number of zealous people, of a radical turn of mind, 
who had suffered persecution during the reign of Mary, 
and, while exiles, had become strongly attached to the 
extreme dogmas of Calvinism. They demanded a 
greater purity of the Church (hence the origin of the 
term "Puritans"), a simple, spiritual form of worship, 
a strict church discipline, and a Presbyterian form of 
government. The Act of Uniformity, in 1559, threat- 
ened all Non-conformists with fines and imprisonment, 
and their ministers with deposition and banishment. 
When' the provisions of the Act began to be enforced 
a number of the No n -conformist ministers formed sepa- 
rate congregations in connection with Presbyteries, 
subsequent to 1572, and a considerable portion of the 
ministers and laity of the Established Church sympa- 
thized with them. The rupture between the parties 
was widen'ed, when, in 1592, by an act of Parliament it 
was decreed that all who obstinately refused to attend 
public worship, or induced others to do so, should be 
imprisoned and submit, or after three months be ban- 
ished; and again, in 1595, w r hen the Presbyterians 
applied the Mosaic Sabbath laws to the Lord's day, and 
when Calvin's doctrines respecting Predestination ex- 
cited bitter and lengthy disputes. 

Thus far, by the aid of history, we have learned that 
Henry VIII. , a very dissolute king, was constituted 
head of the English Church, or the Episcopal Church, 
called so by the fact that all church government is 
lodged in a bench of lordly Bishops, that the Book of 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 77 

Prayer was adopted, which was patterned after the 
Roman Catholic Missal, and that the Thirty-nine Arti- 
cles, which it is not necessary to insert here, became 
the Creed of the English Church. On the general 
character of the Anglican or English Church, George 
P. Fisher, Professor of Ecclesiastical History in Yale 
College, has this to say : 

As head of the Church, the King could make and 
deprive bishops, as he could appoint and degrade all 
other officers in the kingdom. The Episcopal polity 
was retained, partly because the bishops generally fell 
in with the proceedings of Henry VIII. and Edward 
for the reform of the Church, and on account of the 
compact organization of the Monarchy, in consequence 
of which the nation acted as one body. But in the 
first a^e of the Reformation, and until the rise of Puri- 
tanism as a distinct party, there was little controversy 
among Protestants in relation to Episcopacy. Not only 
was Melancthon willing to allow bishops w T ith a jure 
humano authority, but Luther and Calvin were also of 
the same mind. The Episcopal constitution of the 
English Church for a long period put no barrier in the 
way of the most free and fraternal relations between 
that body and the Protestant Churches on the conti- 
nent. As we have seen, Cranmer placed foreign 
divines in very responsible places in the English 
Church. Ministers who had received Presbyterian or- 
dination were admitted to take charge of English 
parishes without a question as to the validity of their 
orders. (History of the Reformation, p. 332-33.) 

"The feature," says Prof. Eisher, "that distinguished 
the English Church from the Reformed Churches on 
the continent, was the retention in its polity and wor- 
ship of so much that had belonged to the Catholic 
system." And the Episcopal Church is to this day 
essentially Catholic. The English Church owes its ex- 
istence more to a stroke of political policy (coup d'etat) 



78 THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES. 

than to a deep conviction of the supremacy of truth. 
The supremacy of the King himself was deemed of 
vastly more importance than the supremacy of apostolic 
truth. In all these controversies the Church of Christ, 
as founded by the apostles, was not once thoroughly and 
distinctively identified. No plan of salvation is defined. 
The Bible is translated, which, for the times, was a 
memorable event, and one fraught with far-reaching 
consequences. The translation of the Bible into the 
vernacular of the people was the harbinger of both the 
civil and religious liberty of modern times. Great rev- 
olutionary principles were abstracted from the Bible, 
and many proof-texts from the Bible furnished matter 
for divisive and contradictory creeds, but the Bible 
itself as an infallible guide, and as containing the divine 
system of salvation, was laid upon the shelf as a useless 
piece of lumber. The controversialists of that period 
scarcely ever make an appeal to the Word of God in 
their efforts to sustain their respective dogmas and the- 
ories. While they all acknowledged the supremacy of 
the Scriptures, and in a general way deferred to them, 
yet the facts go to show that the truth of the Bible was 
nullified and the power of the gospel paralyzed by 
savage and ceaseless controversies — by controversies 
between the defenders of the Augsburg Confession and 
the advocates of the Heidelberg Catechism — by polem- 
ical struggles between Luther and Zwingle — by angry 
disputes between the King of England and the Pope of 
Rome, and by repeated wrangles of opposing Councils. 
Dogmas were popularized, creeds were stereotyped, 
human opinions were consecrated, metaphysical specu- 
lations furnished food for the common mind, and 
doctrinal statements, essentially dead, and wholly inop- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 79 

erative, were made to occupy the place of a living 
Bible. 

Why did not the "Reformers" of the sixteenth cen- 
tury continue as they had begun? Who authorized 
them to make creeds and catechisms, and to formulate 
Church standards? Why did they occupy more time in 
discussing Transubstantiation and Predestination — both 
metaphysical and untaught questions, and not compre- 
hensible by the common people — and on which no 
man's salvation depends — than they spent in preaching 
and teaching just what the apostles preached and 
taught? The followers of the Reformers of the six- 
teenth century have had 350 years in which to follow 
up the apostles, but up to this time they have not found 
them. 



THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER. 



A history of the origin and development of Church 
Creeds is indeed a curious and entertaining, if not a 
profitable, study. The history of Creeds is not a 
history of genuine reformation, but in the manufacture 
of those tests of church fellowship we discover the 
mental and spiritual portraits of uninspired men. God 
"breathed into man the breath of lives," but creed- 
mongers have breathed into creeds the putrid breath of 
sectaries, dogmatists, humanists, traditionists, sciolists, 
scholastics, opinionists, purists, transcendentalists, met- 
aphysicians, and so forth. God made the Bible, but 
men made creeds. The trail of the serpent is found in 
every human creed. The hope of the world is to be 
found in the Bible; the hope of prelates and of priests 
— the glowing hope of all sectarian leaders — can be 
found in diverse Symbols of Faith, in the figments and 
fancies of creed architects, in Church Standards which 
divide the people of one common Lord, and in every 
form of "Systematic Theology," which furnishes em- 
ployment to as many theologians, and to as many 
distinct parties, as are represented by these varying sys- 
tems. In short, the history of creed-making is the 
history of human passion, human prejudice, human 
bigotry, superstition, ignorance of God's Word, human 
ambition, of plots and counterplots, of partisans, of 
strife, of theological tournaments, and of cunning 

(80) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 81 

craftiness. They are the product of ingenious men, in- 
tellectually acute, skilled in the art of dialectics, and 
powerful as polemics. 

The history of the incubation and birth of the English 
Prayer Book, or Book of Common Prayer, is a study 
that will tire any mind, and discourage any heart, if 
one had no other object in view except the mere read- 
ing of its history. It is but just to say that the men, 
as a class, who inflicted creeds upon the world, were 
better in spirit and character than the creeds they 
made; and that whatever of goodness and greatness 
they possessed, and that whatever of purity and nobil- 
ity of life they manifested, they derived directly from 
the Word of God and from the Fountain of Life: 
which fact, by itself alone, is a crushing argument 
against all creeds — even against "Revised Creeds," as 
at present proposed by the orthodox world. 

Before the Reformation of Luther, the Missals, Bre- 
viaries, etc., of the Church of Rome, were in use in 
England. In 1537, the Convocation put forth in En- 
glish, "-The godly and pious Institution of a Christian 
Man" containing the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, the 
Commandments, and the Ave Maria. In 1547, in the 
reign of Edward VI., a committee was appointed to 
draw up a Liturgy in English, free from Popish errors. 
Cranmer, Ridley, and other eminent reformers, com- 
posed this committee, and their book was confirmed by 
Parliament in 1548. This is known as the first Prayer- 
book of Edward VI. A large portion of it was taken 
from the old services used in England before the Refor- 
mation; but the labors of Melancthon and Bucer helped 
to give the book its Protestant form. "About the end 
of the year 1550 exceptions were taken against some 
parts of this book, and Archbishop Cranmer proposed 



82 THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER. 

a new review. The principal alterations occasioned by 
this second review were the addition of the Sentences 
Exhortations, Confession and Absolution, at the begin- 
ning of the morning and evening services, which in the 
first Common Prayer-book began with the Lord's 
Prayer; the addition of the Commandments at the be- 
ginning of the communion office"; the removing of 
some rights and ceremonies retained in the former 
book, sach as the use of oil in confirmation, the unction 
of the sick, prayers for the departed souls, the invoca- 
tion of the Holy Ghost at the consecration of the 
Eucharist, and the prayer of oblation that used to fol- 
low it; the omitting the rubric that ordered water to be 
mixed with the wine, with several other less material 
variations. The habits, likewise, which were prescribed 
in the former book were in this laid aside; and, lastly, 
a rubric was added at the end of the communion office 
to explain the reason of kneeling at the Sacrament." 
(Hook.) The Liturgy, thus revised and altered, was 
again confirmed by Parliament in 1551, and is cited as 
the second Prayer-book of Edward VI Queen Mary, 
on her accession, repealed the acts of Edward, and re- 
stored, through the influence of her Papal advisers, the 
Romanist prayer-book. " On the accession of Elizabeth 
to the English throne, this repeal, however, was re- 
versed, and the second book of Edward VI. with 
several alterations and emendations, was re-established. 
This Liturgy continued in use during the long reign of 
Elizabeth, and received further additions and improve- 
ments." (Eadie Eccles. Enc.) 

Early in the reign of James I. the Prayer Book was 
again revised, but the " improvements" suggested by 
James were not ratified by Parliament. In 1661, the 
year after the restoration of Charles II., the commis- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 83 

sioners, both Episcopal and Presbyterian, who had 
assembled at the Savoy to revise the Liturgy, having 
come to no agreement, the Convocation agreed to cer- 
tain "alterations and additions." The whole book, 
being finished, passed both houses of Convocation; it 
was subscribed to by bishops and clergy, and was rati- 
fied by act of Parliament, and received the royal assent 
May 19, 1662. This was the last revisal of the Book 
of Common Prayer in which any alteration was made 
by public authority. Several attempts have been made 
to revise the book since 1665, but without success. The 
first attempt was made in the reign of William III. en- 
couraged by Tillotson and Stillingfleet, who in 1668 
had united with Bates, Manton and Baxter, in prepar- 
ing a bill, for the " comprehension of Dissenters." 
Failing then, as well as in 1681, the scheme was 
resumed after the Revolution, and in 1689 a commis- 
sion was formed to revise the Prayer-book. A number 
of alterations were suggested, in order, if possible, to 
gratify the Dissenters, but the attempt proved abortive. 
There is at the present time a Liturgical Revision Society 
in England, which, in its Declaration of Principles and 
Objects, proposes to bring the Book of Common Prayer 
"into closer conformity with the written word of God 
and the principles of the Reformation, by excluding all 
those expressions which have been assumed to counte- 
nance Romanizing doctrine or practice." 

After the American Revolution, the "Protestant 
Episcopal Church" w r as established as an organization 
separate from the Church of England, in 1784. In 
1786, a committee was appointed to adapt the English 
Liturgy to use in America, and they prepared a book, 
which, however, never came into general use. 

At the General Convention in October, 1789, the 



84 THE BJOK OF COMMON PRAYER. 

whole subject of the Liturgy was thrown open by ap- 
pointing committees on the different portions of the 
Prayer-book, whose several reports, with the action of 
the two houses thereupon, were consolidated in the Book 
of Common Prayer, etc., as it is now in use, the whole 
book being ratified and set forth by a vote of the Con- 
vention on the sixteenth of October, 1789, its use being 
prescribed from and after the first day of October, 1790. 
The American Liturgy retails all that is excellent in 
the English service, omits several of its really objection- 
able features, brings some of the offices \ the communion, 
for example) nearer to the primitive pattern, modifies 
others to suit our peculiar institutions, and, on the 
whole, is a noble monument to the wisdom, prudence, 
piety and churchmanship of the fathers of the Ameri- 
can Church. By the forty-fifth canon of 1832, it is 
required that every minister shall, before all sermons 
and lectures, and all other occasions of public worship, 
use the Book of Common Prayer, as the same is or may 
be established by the authority of the General Conven- 
tion of this Church. And in performing said service, 
no other prayers shall be used than those prescribed by 
the said book. (Hook, Church Dictionary, Am. Ed.) 

We ask, where is the scriptural authority for all this 
priestly jugglery and ecclesiastical legislation? There 
is no scriptural authority, and the creed-mongers do not 
pretend to give any. The whole question rests upon 
assumptions. Why, instead of working over three 
hundred years to bring the Book of Common Prayer 
"into conformity with the written word of God/' did they 
not take the "written word of God," and stand upon it 
and stay there? Why have they been shuffling around 
these many years? If it is reform they are after, and 
they are truly seeking the unity of God's people, and if 
they are really desirous of discovering and identifying 
the Apostolic Church, why not. accept the teaching of 
inspired apostles, and follow the teaching of the apos- 
tles, and pattern after the model Church as established 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 85 

by those holy men of God? We answer, because if 
they were to do so, they would be shorn of ecclesiasti- 
cal power; bishops could no longer legislate for the 
"laity;" distinctive titles of honor would have to be 
given up; bishops could not live sumptuously every 
day, and there would be a heavy decrease in their stip- 
ends; they could no longer lord it over God's heritage, 
and all chances for clerical and prelatical promotion 
would be cut off. Liturgies, and " Church standards," 
and Confessions of Faith, are changed from time to 
time, so as to be adapted to the people and to the 
times. This is worldly wisdom, but not the wisdom 
that comes from above. These ecclesiastical vandals 
dare not change the Bible to suit times and places, and 
the people; but they will assume to create a creed, and 
then assume to change it with the changing times. 
Did Christ and his apostles leave instructions to the 
effect that the gospel and the plan of salvation should, 
in successive ages, be so changed as to harmonize with 
every form of society, and with the varying forms of 
civil goverment? God intended that the truths of the 
Bible and the doctrine of the gospel should educate and 
mold society and civil governments, and not that eccle- 
siastics and civil governments should transform the 
word of God into Creeds and Symbols of Faith. Why 
not as well undertake to change the immutable laws of 
nature as to presume to alter or modify the constitu- 
tional laws of the kingdom of God? 

What kind of an infallible guide is that to the human 
soul, that "omits objectionable features," and modifies 
others to suit our "peculiar institutions," in order to 
bring the people " nearer to the primitive pattern ?" Why 
not take the "primitive pattern" itself, and lay aside 
all makeshifts and counterfeits? Can we not under- 



86 THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER. 

stand the " primitive pattern" — God's own workmanship 
—far easier than all human imitations? Creeds do 
not contain the principles of reform, much less the light 
and the knowledge that lead to a complete restoration 
of apostolic Christianity. If men are wiser and better, 
it is because their love of God and their love of Bible 
truths has made them so. They are good in spite of 
their lifeless creeds. Creeds have not revolutionized 
the w y orld, and set up the right and torn down the 
wrontf, but the spirit of Christ and the power of the 
gospel have done it. 






ORIGIN OF THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION 

OF FAITH. 



We now come to speak of the origin of the Presby- 
terian Church and of the formation of the Westminster 
Confession of Faith. A joint resolution of the houses 
of the English Parliament, without the sanction of 
King Charles L, was passed June 12, 1643, which con- 
voked a Synod u for settling the government and liturgy 
of the Church of England, and for vindicating and 
clearing of the doctrine of said Church from false 
aspersions and interpretations," and, furthermore, for 
bringing about a more perfect reformation of the 
Church than was obtained under Edward VI. and 
Elizabeth, by which a closer union of sentiment with 
the Church of Scotland and the Reformed churches of 
the continent might be secured. Parliament appointed 
to membership in this Synod 121 clergymen, taken from 
the various shires of England, ten members of the 
House of Lords, and twenty members from the House 
of Commons. The General Synod of Scotland, August 
19, 1643, elected five clergymen and three lay elders as 
commissioners to the Westminster Synod. About 
twenty of the members originally summoned were cler- 
gymen of the Church of England, and several of them 
afterwards bishops; but few of the Episcopal members 
took their seats. The bishops of the English Church 
never acknowledged its claims, and the King con- 

(87) 



88 ORIGIN OF THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH. 

demnecl its sessions under extreme penalties, June 22, 
1643. The Synod, however, contrary to the will of the 
King, convened July 1, 1643, in Westminster Abbey 
(hence the name, Westminster Confession of Faith), in 
the presence of both houses of Parliament. The aver- 
age attendance of clerical members during the sessions 
was between sixty and eighty. The great body of the 
members, both clerical and lay, were Presbyterians; ten 
or twelve were Independents, or, as now styled, Con- 
gregationalists; and tive or six called themselves Eras- 
tians. The great majority were Calvinistic in faith. 

The purposes for which this august Assembly of 
divines was convoked, as already intimated, wer^ to 
vindicate, the doctrine of the Church of England, and 
to recommend such further reformation of her disci- 
pline, liturgy and government as might "be agreeable 
to God's holy word, and most apt to procure and 
preserve the peace of the Church at home, and nearer 
agreement with the Church of Scotland and other Re- 
formed churches abroad." But the Parliament, feeling 
their need of Scottish aid, acceded to the Solemn League 
and Covenant, and urged the Scotch to send their depu- 
ties to the Assembly. Its objects were extended; and, 
in order to carry out the covenanted uniformity, it was 
empowered to prepare a new Confession of Faith and 
Catechism, as well as directories for public worship and 
church government, which might be adopted by all the 
Churches represented. The Church of Scotland threw 
all its influence in favor of strict Calvinism and Presby- 
terianism. Before electing delegates to the Westminster 
Assembly, in compliance with the request of Parliament, 
it adopted, August 17, 1643, the so-called "Solemn 
League and Covenant," which bound the Scottish 
nation to the defense of the Reformed religion in Scot- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 89 

land, the furtherance of the Reformation in England 
and Ireland in doctrine, worship, church organization 
and discipline; the establishing of ecclesiastical and 
religious uniformity in the three realms; the extirpa- 
tion of papacy and prelacy, of heresy and all ungodli- 
ness; and the support of all the rights of Parliament 
and of the rightful authority of the King. This 
document was immediately transmitted to Parliament, 
and thence to the Westminster Assembly, and was 
formally endorsed by each of these bodies, but was 
condemned by the King. The Assembly sought to 
gain the fraternal sympathies of the Reformed churches 
on the continent also, and to that end addressed to 
them circular letters which elicited more or less favora- 
ble responses, and which the King endeavored to 
neutralize by issuing a manifesto in Latin and English, 
in which he denied the intention charged upon him of 
re-establishing the Papal power in his realm. The Sol- 
emn League and Covenant, binding the ecclesiastical 
bodies of the two nations into a union, had been passed 
in Scotland, August 17, was subsequently accepted by 
the Westminster Assembly, and ordered by the English 
Parliament to be printed, September 21, and subscribed 
September 25, when the House of Commons, with the 
Scottish Commissioners and the Westminster Assembly, 
met in the Church of St. Margaret, Westminster. The 
House of Lords took the "Covenant," October 15. 

u The question of church government occasioned the 
most difficulty, and seemed for a time impossible to be 
settled. Many of the most learned divines who w r ere 
entirely on the side of the Parliament were yet in favor 
of what they termed primitive episcopacy, or the 
system in w T hich the presbyters and their president 

governed the churches in common. Then there were 
8 



90 ORIGIN OF THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH. 

the Scottish commissioners and the more radical Puritans, 
who were at the opposite extreme; and, in order to 
reach a conclusion, these differences must he reconciled. 
It was accomplished after much discussion a. id i uig 
delay by the adoption of the Presbyterian l »rm <>i gov- 
ernment." 

A committee, consisting of about twenty-live members, 
was appointed by the Assembly "to prepare matter fur a 
joint Confession of Faith," about August 20, 1(344. The 
matter was prepared, in part, at least, by this committee, 
and the digesting of it into a formal draught was in- 
trusted to a smaller committee on May 12, 1645. The 
debating of the separate articles began July 7, 1645, and 
the following day a committee of three (after vards 
increased to live) was appointed to ''take care of the 
wording of the Confession," as the article should be 
adopted in the Assembly. On July 16, the committee 
reported the heads of the Confession, and these were 
distributed to the three large committees to be elabo- 
rated and prepared for discussion. All were repeatedly 
read and debated in the most thorough manner possible 
in the Assembly. On September 25, 1646, a part of the 
Confession was finally passed, and on December 4, the 
remainder received the sanction of the Assembly, when 
the entire document was presented to the Parliament. 
That body ordered the printing of 600 copies for the use 
of members of Parliament and of the Assembly, and 
that Scripture proofs should be added to the Confession, 
which was accordingly done. In 1647, the Confession 
was approved by the Church of Scotland in the form 
in which it passed the Assembly, and it was afterwards 
ratified by the Scotch Parliament. It was passed by 
the English Parliament in 1648, under the titie of 
Articles of Christian Religion, but with certain changes. 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 91 

The basis of the Confession, says the historian, is doubt- 
less those Calvinistic articles which are supposed to 
have been prepared by Usher, and in 1615, were adopted 
by the Convocation of the Irish Church. In the forma- 
tion of this Presbyterian "Symbol" the Assembly at 
first undertook to revise the Thirty-nine Articles of the 
Anglican Church, and proceeded with that work until 
fifteen articles had been revamped with elements of a 
more pronounced Calvinistic character and provided 
with Scripture proofs. The only important change 
made in this process was the omission of Article VIII., 
concerning the authority of the three oecumenical 
symbols. The intention of the Synod was to ground 
every statement directly on Scripture as the only rule 
of faith, while the Church of England, under Edward 
VI. and Elizabeth, conceded to Catholic tradition, "if 
not in conflict with Scripture, a regulative authority." 
The Scottish delegates, however, induced the Assembly 
to undertake the formation of an entirely " new Symbol." 
The Confession, under the title of " The Humble Ad- 
vice of the Assembly of Divines, now by Authority of 
Parliament sitting at Westminster, concerning a Confession 
of Faith/' etc., was printed in London in December, 
1646, without proofs, and in May, 1647, with proofs, for 
the use of the houses of Parliament and the Assembly. 
A copy of this last edition was taken to Scotland by 
the commissioners, and from it 300 copies were printed 
for the use of the General Assembly there. After being 
approved by that body, it was published in Scotland 
with the title of " The Confession of Faith Agreed upon 
by the Assembly of Divines," etc., and while the House 
of Commons were still considering it, a London book- 
seller brought it out under the same title in 1648. In 
the same year it was, with the omission of parts of 



92 ORIGIN OF THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH. 

certain chapters, and with some minute verbal altera- 
tions, approved by the two houses, and published under 
the title, " Articles of Christian Religion, Approved and 
Passed by both Houses of Parliament after Advice had 
with the Assembly of Divines.- 1 But the latter form is 
not common, and the Confession continues to be printed 
in the form in which it was drawn by the Assembly and 
approved by the Church of Scotland. The last of the 
Scotch commissioners left the Assembly November 9, 
1647. On February 22, 1649, after the Assembly had 
held 1163 sittings, lasting each from nine o'clock A. m. 
to 2 p. m., the Parliament, by an ordinance, changed 
what remained of the Assembly into a committee for 
trying and examining ministers, and in this form it 
continued to hold weekly sittings until the dissolution of 
the "Long Parliament," April 20, 1653. The Larger 
Catechism was sent to the House of Commons October 
22, 1647; the Shorter Catechism, November 25, the same 
year. In the autumn of 1648 both houses of Parlia- 
ment ordered the printing and publishing of the Shorter 
Catechism, but the House of the Lords w r as discontinued 
before it had acted on the Larger Catechism. 

And thus, in the midst of such politico ecclesiastical 
throes as we have described, the Westminster Confession 
of Faith was born into the world. We have seen that 
the civil powers had as much to do in the manufacture 
of this abstruse, recondite, metaphysical document as the 
Church "Divines." It is the creation of State craft and 
priest craft. It is a compromise between Romanism 
and Episcopacy — a sort of hybrid, begotten of the 
Papacy and born of Protestantism. Facts go to show 
that Episcopacy and Presbyterianism, as well -as Roman- 
ism, would now, as then, make civil government sub- 
servient to the ecclesiastical authorities. It is but just 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 93 

to say that through the instrumentality of the Reformers 
of the sixteenth century the Papacy received a fatal 
blow. But let it be understood that it was not the 
formulation and publication of Confessions of Faith, 
nor the influence of the abstract propositions they 
contained, that paralyzed the arm of the Pope, and that 
gave impulse to the Reformatory movements of that 
eventful age. On the contrary, it was the translation 
of the Scriptures into the language of the common 
people, and the faithful proclamation of God's word, 
that effectually aud fatally weakened the despotism of 
Rome. It was Luther and Zwingle, exposing the rot- 
tenness of the priesthood of Rome, aud Calvin, by the 
word of God, striking at the false theology of Romish 
prelates, and Knox, by the same word of God, before 
creeds took on form, demolishing the governmental 
usurpations of the Papal See, that, combined and co- 
operating, wrought the might}^ work, the impulse of 
which revolution still moves among modern reformers. 
As a Bible people, we accept the Bible principles of 
reform, as advocated and applied by the reformers of 
the sixteenth century, but we reject their Creeds in toto, 
as being the product of fallible and uninspired men, and 
as being the proline and chief source of sectarianism 
aud a divided Church, with all their concomitants of 
sectarian rivalry, sectarian bigotry and sectarian pride. 
We have our mission, and we know our mission, which 
is the repudiation of all Symbols of Faith, all Church 
Standards, and all bodies that presume to legislate for 
the Church in the stead of Christ, while at the same 
time we shall elevate the Bible above all the works of 
men, and persistently plead for complete restoration of 
apostolic teaching aud practice. 



ORIGIN OF CONGREGATIONALISM. 



We now come to the origin and development of Con- 
gregationalism, which forms an integral and interesting 
chapter in reformatory movements. As contrasted with 
Romanism and Episcopacy, and as contrasted also with 
Presbyterianism, we shall find Congregationalism, as a 
system of " Church polity," far in advance of those 
ecclesiastical systems, but, in some features, as falling 
short of the apostolic order of things. We are free to 
admit that Congregationalism makes a nearer approach 
to the primitive order than any of the " Orthodox 
Churches." They claim that their system is only a 
substantial return to the order and practice of the 
apostolic churches, which had been corrupted by the 
tendencies that culminated in the Papacy; and that 
traces of dissent from the episcopal power are found in 
every age. (See Punchard's History of Congregational- 
ism) The origin of modern Congregationalism may 
be traced to the early developments of the Reformation 
in England, an account of which we have already given. 
From the beginning of the protest against Romanism, 
some of the principal distinctive opinions, afterwards 
developed into Congregational polity, especially the 
identity of "bishop" and "presbyter," and notably the 
independent right of each congregation to chose its own 
"pastor" and exercise discipline, without the interposition 
of council or bishop, found decided advocates and un- 

(94) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 95 

flinching adherents. While Henry VIII., after repudi- 
ating the Romish supremacy, which we have already 
noted, adhered to the essential features of Romish 
theology, and in part to Papal polity and practice, the 
advancement of enlightened reason continued in the 
opposite direction. When the reforms conducted by 
Edward VI., already noted in previous chapters of this 
series, were peremptorily brought to a standstill by 
Mary, Queen of Scotland, dissenting congregations, the 
forecast substantially of modern Congregationalism, 
came immediately, though privately, into existence in 
various places, as, for instance, in London in 1555. Their 
existence is learned almost entirely from persecutions 
to which their members were subjected, but of which 
few particulars are preserved in history. 

Among the Congregational martyrs were Barrowe, 
Greenwood and Penry, executed in 1593. Of the Con- 
gregational Church formed in London in 1592, of which 
Francis Johnson was ''pastor," and John Greenwood 
"teacher," fifty-six members were seized and impris- 
oned. Many of them eventually found their way to 
Amsterdam, where they re-organized under tbe same 
pastor. Robert Brown's publication, in 1582, of "A 
Book which showetb the Life and Manners of all true 
Christians," etc., presents the earliest full development 
of the Independent side of Congregationalism. While 
at first only Puritans, many became Separatists, in 
despair of securing complete reformation in the Church 
of England. About the year 1602 a congregation was 
organized in Gainesborough in Lincolnshire, Rev. John 
Smyth pastor. In 1606 another congregation was 
formed at Scrooby, Nottinghamsbire, Richard Clyton 
pastor, which met at the house of William Brewster. 
Of that congregation John Robinson was a member^ 



96 ORIGIN OF CONGREGATIONALISM. 

and afterwards associate pastor. In 1606 Mr. Smyth 
and his friends removed to Amsterdam. In the follow- 
ing year Mr. Clyton and many of his church members, 
after - enduring great persecution, also escaped to Am- 
sterdam, and in 1608 the majority of the remaining 
members of the Serooby congregation followed. After 
the lapse of about a year the church removed to Leyden. 
But owing to the disadvantage of residing in a country 
of different language and customs from their own, they 
resolved to emigrate to America, and consequently a 
portion of the Leyden Church, with Elder William 
Brewster, after many tedious trials, landed at Plymouth, 
Massachusetts, Dec. 21, 1620 (N". S.), while Robinson, 
with a portion of the congregation, remained at Leyden. 
In 1616 a Congregational Church was established at 
Southwark, London, under the care of Henry Jacob, 
who had been confirmed in Congregational principles 
by conference with John Robinson at Leyden. This 
congregation, organized after Mr. Jacob had conferred 
with leading Puritans, probably gathered together 
some of the scattered members of Mr. Johnson's con- 
gregation. 

Though sometimes called "the first Independent 
Church in England/' there had been in existence secret 
organizations in the reign of Mary, and the congrega- 
tions of Gainesborough and Serooby, and, it is said, 
one at Duckenfield, Cheshire Co. About 1624 Rev. 
John Lathrop became pastor of the Southwark congre- 
gation. In 1632 he was imprisoned, with forty others 
of its members. In 1634 Mr. Lathrop, having been 
released, removed to America, with about thirty of his 
fiock, and in that year organized the congregation in 
Scituate, Massachusetts, where he continued till 1639. 
when the majority removed to West Barnstable, where 
that congregation is still existing. 



AMERICAN CONGREGATIONALISM. 



The history of the American Congregationalists is 
pretty well known. The Plymouth settlement was 
distinct in origin and government from that of Massa- 
chusetts Bay, the Pilgrim settlers being distinctively 
known as the "Pilgrims." The persecutions under 
Laud, in the Old Country, drove many Puritans into 
the resolution to emigrate. Endicott and his compan- 
ions began the colony at Salem, Mass., in 1628, and 
1630, John Winthrop, their governor, with other emi- 
grants, occupied Boston and the surrounding towns. 
Settlements were made at Hartford and Say brook, in 
Connecticut, in 1635, and in 1638, Davenport and his 
associates founded the New Haven colony, while in 
1633 a distinct company reinforced the colonies on the 
Piscataqua River. The Plymouth congregation had 
come out fully organized; in the other settlements con- 
gregations were immediately formed. None except the 
Plymouth people had come to America as Separatists; 
the others declared that they did not separate from the 
Church of England, but that, on the contrary, they only 
desired to expurgate its corruptions. But, having 
colonized in a strange and far-away country, removed 
from all ecclesiastical establishments, and searching the 
Scriptures as the basis of their ecclesiastical order, they 
all adopted the Congregational Church polity. Most 
of their ministers had been regularly ordained in the 
9 (97) 



98 AMERICAN CONGREGATIONALISM. 

Church of England, and, as is well known, were a 
highly educated class of men, as (e. g. ) Cotton and 
Wilson, of Boston; Mather, of Dorchester; Hooker 
and Stone, of Hartford; Davenport and Hooke, of !N~ew 
Haven. 

American Congregationalism proper received its 
religious form, essentially, in the early religious history 
of New England. If traced to the writings of any one 
person, it w r onld be to those of John Robinson, of Ley- 
den; those of John Cotton and Thomas Hooker, in 
America, being next in importance. Robert Brown was 
never acknowledged as a leader, he being a strict and 
severe Independent, and, finally, returning to the com- 
munion of the Church of England; but, at the same 
time, it is conceded that his writings did undoubtedly 
incite many minds to examine and reject the claims of 
Episcopacy. The system, can not, however, be satisfac- 
torily traced to any one man, but rather to the united 
sentiment of the early emigrants, who agreed in carrying 
into practice the opinion that every congregation is, 
according to the Scriptures, confined to the limits of a 
single or individual congregation, and that it must be 
democratic in government; while, at the same time, all 
congregations are regarded as in fellowship with one 
another. Hence the term a the Congregational Church" 
is never used to denote the denomination, but " the 
Congregational churches." 

Congregationalists are generally Calvinistic in the- 
ology, although in the United States there is an 
advanced party who repudiate distinctive Calvinism. 
Congregationalists, as a class, hold to a system of church 
government which embraces these two fundamental 
principles, viz., (1) that every local congregation of 
believers, united for worship, and for observing the 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 99 

" sacraments, " and for the enforcement of discipline, is 
a complete church within itself, and can not be subjected 
in governmental affairs to any ecclesiastical authority 
outside of itself; and (2) that all such local congregations 
are in communion with one another, and are under 
moral obligations to fulfill all the duties involved in such 
fellowship. The system is distinguished from Pres- 
byterianism by the first, and from Independency by the 
second. It involves the equal right of all the members 
to vote in all governmental affairs; and the parity of 
all ministers, the ministers being set apart by the con- 
gregations, and who, as ministers, are not invested with 
any power of government, but who have official power 
only in the congregations by which they may be chosen 
pastors. It is seen that in regard to the independency 
(autonomy) of the congregations, the Congregationalists 
occupy nearly the same position as that which is held 
by the Disciples of Christ, or by those people who have 
in reality identified the Church of Christ as established 
by the apostles. But the Congregationalists are not 
only wrong in name, viewed from the angle of apostolic 
teaching, but they are wrong in doctrine, which is made 
clear by the fact that they have, in common with all 
pedobaptists, substituted aspersion and rantism for 
immersion, and practice infant baptism, in respect to 
which practices they are not a whit in advance of the 
Romish Church, from which these violations.of the law 
of God have descended. They are right in discarding 
councils, Synods, Conferences and Presbyteries, and 
right in denying all ecclesiastical authority beyond the 
individual congregation, but they are decidedly wrong 
in changing the ordinances of Jesus Christ. As means 
of regeneration, they are right in denying the alleged 
spiritual influence of dreams, and visions, and psy- 



J AMERICAN CONGREGATIONALISM. 

etiological impressions, and all hallucinations of the 
imagination, but as an exponent of the true Apostolic 
Church, in all the constituent elements of the one body? 
the Congregational Church is materially defective. It 
is not built exclusively upon the basis of God's Word, 
and hence never can form the nucleus of Christian unity 
because, if a system is found to be defective in one or 
more parts, it must be rejected as a whole. A system 
of things which presumes to represent the divine model 
and at the same time incorporates tradition and false 
dogmas, professedly on the principle of human expedi- 
ency, and with a view of conciliating the captious and 
unregenerated world, can never hope to restore, unim- 
paired, the apostolic order of things. 

Hence the necessity of the existence of the people 
known as the Disciples of Christ, who, repudiating all 
ecclesiastical authority outside of the government of 
Christ, and who, rejecting all the creeds and dogmas of 
contradictory and self-consuming sects, plant themselves 
exclusively upon the inspired Scriptures, as their only 
reliable and infallible guide, and as their only rule of 
faith and practice. Their tocsin of war is the avowed 
destruction of all sectism, and the motto of the banner 
they bear is "one Lord, one Faith and one Baptism." 
They regard the divisions of Christendom as a positive 
sin, and also as the prolific source of infidelity. They 
assume that "the unity of the Spirit" can only secure 
"the bond of peace" — a permanent and lasting peace — 
by an appeal to the Holy Scriptures, as the only source of 
information and authority. They constantly keep before 
their eyes the last intercessory prayer of our Lord: 
"Neither pray I for these alone [the apostles]; but for 
them also who shall believe on me through their word: that 
they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in 



[REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 101 

thee ; that they also may be one in us : that the world may 
believe that thou hast sent me." We hold that sinners 
can only be saved, and church unity accomplished, 
through the words of the apostles; for Christ said to 
the apostles: " Whoever hears you, hears me; and 
whoever hears me, hears him who sent me." And to 
the Corinthians (2 Cor. v. 20) Paul writes: "J^ow then 
we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did be- 
seech you by us; we pray you in Christ's stead, be you 
reconciled to God." Paul said to Timothy, " Preach the 
Word/' which excludes the preaching of dogmas, theo- 
ries, opinions, Church polities, human Creeds and 
"Church Standards." 



4 . 



ORIGIN OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 



Tss-<5rigin of the Baptist Church is confessedly ob- 
scure. It is a difficult and involved history to trace. 
The Baptist Church, distinctively, can not be traced 
beyond the sixteenth century. It is purely a creation 
of circumstances. Its incipient developments are found 
in the religious chaos of the sixteenth century. In the 
midst of all the diversities of opinion that existed in 
the Reformation of that eventful period, it was con- 
stantly maintained by Protestants that " Holy Scripture 
containetli all things necessary to salvation, so that 
whatsoever is neither read therein nor may be proved 
thereby, although it be some time received of the faith- 
ful as godly and profitable for an order and comeliness, 
yet no man ought to be constrained to believe it as an 
article of faith or repute it requisite to the necessity of 
salvation." (Articles of King Edward VI. ) The oper- 
ation of this broad principle of toleration and private 
judgment was denied by the Church of Rome, and? 
consequently, those who adopted this principle, mani- 
festly so fair and equitable, suffered the anathemas of 
the Papal powers. Each separate body of Protestants 
claimed the privilege of standing on the basis of the 
Scriptures, and was prepared to resist alike the tyranny 
of Rome and what it considered the license of other 
Protestant sects. Thus it came to pass that the Bap- 
tists, or, as their opponents called them, the Anabaptists 

(102) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 103 

(or, as Zwingle mimes them, Catabaptists), were stren- 
uously opposed by all other sects of Protestantism, and 
it was regarded by nearly all the early reformers to be 
the duty of the civil magistrates to punish them with 
fine and imprisonment, and even with death, as an 
abundance of historical documents attest. A writer in 
the Encyclopaedia Britannica says : " There was, no 
doubt, some justification for this severity in the fact 
that the fanaticism which burst forth in the early times 
of the Reformation frequently led to insurrection and 
revolt, and in particular that the leader of the 'peasant 
war' in Saxony, Thomas Miinzer, and probably many 
of his followers, were Anabaptists both on the continent 
and in this country (England) are very few and meagre. 
Almost all that is currently known of them comes to us 
from their opponents." 

There is, however, much valuable information, to- 
gether with detailed accounts of their sufferings, in the 
Dutch Martyrology of Yan Braght, himself a Baptist 
which bears the title Martalaers Spiegel der Doopsgesinde 
(2d od. fol., 1685), an English translation of the latter 
half of which was published in two vols., 8vo., London, 
1850-53, edited by Dr. Underbill, now Secretary of the 
Baptist Missionary Society. Probably the earliest con- 
fession of faith of any Baptist community is that given 
by Zwingle in the second part of his JElenchus contra 
Catabaptistas, published in 1527. Zwingle professes to 
give it entire, translating it, as he says, ad verbum into 
Latin. He upbraids his opponents with not having 
published these articles, but declares that there is 
scarcely any one of them that has not a written (de- 
scriptum) copy of these laws which have been so well 
concealed. The articles are in all seven. The first, 
which we give in full, relates to baptism : 



104 ORIGIN OP THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 

Baptism ought to be given to all who have been taught 
repentance and change of life, and who in truth, believe 
that through Christ their sins are blotted out (abotila), 
and the sins of all who are willing (yolunt) to walk in 
the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and who are willing to 
be buried with him into death (not very good Baptist 
doctrine in the present age) that they may rise again 
with him. To all, therefore, who in this manner seek 
baptism, and of themselves ask us, we will give it. By 
this rule are excluded all baptism of infants, the great 
abomination of the Roman pontiff. For this article we 
have the testimony and strength of Scripture, we have 
also the practice of the apostles; which things we sim- 
ply and also steadfastly will observe, for we are assured 
of them. 

The second article, we are told by the same writer, 
relates to withdrawment (abstentio) or excommunication, 
and declares that all who have given themselves to the 
Lord and have been baptized into the one body of Christ 
should, if they lapse into sin, he excommunicated. 
(The Baptists of the present day baptize into the Bap- 
tist Church, not "into the one body of Christ," as the 
Disciples of Christ teach). The third article relates to 
the breaking of bread; in this it is declared that they 
who break the one bread in commemoration of the 
broken body of Christ, and drink of the one cup in 
commemoration of his blood poured out, must first be 
united together into the one body of Christ, that is, into 
the Church of God — which is not the Baptist Church 
of the present clay. The fourth article asserts the duty 
of separation from the world and its abominations, 
among which are included all papistical and semi- 
papistical works. The fifth relates to pastors of the 
congregation. They assert that the pastor should be 
some one of the flock who has a good report from those 
who are without. "His office is to read, admonish, 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 105 

teach, learn, exhort, correct, or excommunicate in the 
church, and to preside well over all the brethren and 
sisters, both in prayer and in the breaking of bread; 
and in all things that relate to the body of Christ, to 
watch that it may be established and increased so that 
the name of God may by us be glorified and praised, 
and that the mouth of blasphemers may be stopped." 
The sixth article relates to the power of the sword. 
"The sword," they say, "is the ordinance of God out- 
side the perfection of Christ, by which the bad is 
punished and slain, and the good is defended." They 
further declare that a Christian ought not to decide or 
give sentence in secular matters, and that he ought not 
to exercise the office of magistrate. The seventh article 
relates to oaths, which they declare are forbidden of 
Christ. 

It is here proper to state, for the benefit of the general 
reader, that the name "Anabaptist" means one baptism 
upon another baptism, or the immersion of those who 
have been sprinkled. There is no doubt of the fact that 
the Anabaptists sufTered terrible persecution, and that 
all sorts of epithets of abuse and calumny were heaped 
upon their devoted heads. Zwingle styles them as 
"fanatical, stolid, audacious, impious." To us, at the 
present day, who enjoy personal liberty and religious 
toleration, it appears as shocking as it is wonderful, 
that the Protestant council of Zurich, which had with 
great difficulty won its own liberty, should pass a 
decree, as Zwingle himself reports, that any person 
who administers anabaptism should be drowned; and 
still more shocking that, at the time when Zwingle 
wrote, this cruel decree should have been carried into 
effect against one of the leaders of the Anabaptists, 
Felix Mantz, who himself had been associated with 



106 ORIGIN OF THE BAPTIST CHURJH. 

Zwingle, not only as a student, but also at the begin- 
ning of the Reformation. In this base and contemptible 
persecution, the reformers of the sixteenth century have 
very little to be proud of, and such persecution on the 
part of the reformers only goes to show that the blight 
of Romanism still clung to them, as it still does to their 
descendants of the present day. In 15-37 Men no 
Simonis united with the Anabaptists and soon distin- 
guished himself as their acknowledged leader. His 
moderation and piety, according to Mosheini, held in 
check the turbulent spirit of the more fanatical among 
them. He died in 1561, after a life passed amid contin- 
ual dangers and conflicts. His name remains as the 
ecclesiastical designation of the Mennonites, who event- 
ually settled in the Netherlands under the protection of 
William the Silent, Prince of Orange, many of them 
emigrating to the United States, and settling in the 
Middle and Western States, where their descendants 
have been largely absorbed by the various denomina- 
tions, though some remain in separate bands, here and 
there, who have become wholly indifferent to immer- 
sion. 

The Encyclopaedia Britannica says that "of the intro- 
duction of Baptist views into England we have no 
certain knowledge." Fox relates "that the registers of 
London make mention of certain Dutchmen counted 
for Anabaptists, of whom ten were put to death in sun- 
dry places in the realm, anno 1535; the other ten 
repented and were saved." In 1536 Henry VIIL, as 
"in earth supreme head of the Church of England," 
issued a proclamation together with articles concerning 
faith agreed upon by Convocation, in which the clergy 
are told to instruct the people that they ought to repute 
and take "the Anabaptists' opinions for detestable her- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 107 

esies and to be utterly condemned." The document is 
given in extenso by Fuller, who further tells us from 
Stow's Chronicles that, in the year 1538, -'four Anabap- 
tists, three men and one woman, all Dutch, bare fagots 
at Paul's Cross, and three days after a man and woman 
of their sect were burnt in Smithfield." The Anabap- 
tists united in communities separate from the Established 
Church. Latimer, in 1552, speaks of them as segrega- 
ting themselves from the company of other men. We 
have not space to follow the history of the persecutions 
which the Anabaptists endured in England for opinion's 
sake. About the beginning of the seventeenth century 
the severe laws against the Puritans led many dissenters 
to emigrate to Holland. Some of these were Baptists, 
and an English Baptist Church was formed in Amster- 
dam ahout the year 1609. In 1611 this church published 
u a declaration of faith of English people remaining at 
Amsterdam, in Holland." The article relating to bap- 
tism is as follows: "That every church is to receive in 
all their members by the confession of their faith and 
sins [Modern Baptists do not teach this apostolic prac- 
tice, but the disciples of Christ do, mark that], wrought 
by the preaching of the gospel according to the primi- 
tive institution and practice. And therefore, churches 
constituted after any other manner [mark that too], or 
of any other persons, are not according to Christ's test- 
ament. That baptism or washing with water is the 
outward manifestation of dying unto sin and walking 
in newness of life; and therefore in nowise appertaineth 
to infants." Many members of the Brownist or Inde- 
pendent denomination held baptist views. An In- 
dependent congregation in London, gathered in the 
year 1616, included several such persons, and as the 
congregation was larger than could conveniently meet 



108 ORIGIN OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 

together in times of persecution, they agreed to allow 
these persona to constitute a distinct congregation, 
which was formed on the 12th of September, 1633; and 
upon this the majority, if not all, of the new congrega 
tion were baptized. Another Baptist Church was 
formed in London, in 1639. These churches were 
"Particular" or Calvinistic Baptists. The church 
formed in 1609 at Amsterdam, held Arminian views. 
In 1644 a Confession of Faith was published in the 
names of seven congregations in London, "commonly 
(thougn falsely) called Anabaptists," in which were in- 
cluded the two congregations just mentioned. The 
article on baptism is as follows: "That baptism is an 
ordinance of the New Testament given by Christ to be 
dispensed only upon persons professing faith, or that 
are disciples, or taught, who, upon a profession of faith 
[not the recital of a dreamy "experience," as modern 
Baptists hold], ought to be baptized." "The way and 
manner of dispensing this ordinance the Scripture holds 
out to be dipping or plunging the whole body under 
water." They made a clear distinction between the 
rights of conscience and the rights of the civil magis- 
trates. 

After showing their willingness to yield "subjection 
and obedience " to the magistrates, as unto the Lord, 
and after indulging the hope that Grod would "incline 
the magistrates' hearts so far to tender our consciences 
as that we might be protected by them from wrong, 
injury, oppression, and molestation," they proceed to 
say : " But if God withhold the magistrates' allowance 
and furtherance herein, yet we must, notwithstanding, 
proceed together in Christian communion, not daring 
to give place to suspend our practice, but to walk in 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 109 

obedience to Christ in the profession and holding forth 
this faith before mentioned, even in the midst of all 
trials and afflictions, not accounting our goods, lands, 
wives, children, fathers, mothers, brethren, sisters, yea, 
and our own lives, dear unto us, so that we may finish 
our course with joy; remembering always that we ought 
to obey God rather than men." They close their Con- 
fession thus: "If any take this that we have said to be 
heresy, then do we with the apostle freely confess, that 
after the way which the}?- call heresy worship we the 
God of our fathers, believing all things which are 
written in the Law and in the Prophets and Apostles, 
desiring from our souls to disclaim all heresies and 
opinions which are not after Christ, and to be steadfast, 
immovable, always abounding in the work of .the Lord, 
as knowing our labor shall not be in vain in the Lord." 
This breathing spell, however, was not of long continu- 
ance, for soon after the Restoration, in 1660, the meetings 
of Nonconformists were continually disturbed by the 
constables, and their preachers were carried before the 
magistrates and fined or imprisoned, of which numerous 
instances could be given. 

The history of the persecution of Baptists, as well as 
of other Protestant dissenters, ceases with the Revolu- 
tion of 1688, and the passing of the Act of Toleration 
in 1689. The removal of the remaining disabilities, 
such as those imposed by the Test and Corporation 
Acts repealed in 1828, has no special bearing on 
Baptists more than on other Nonconformists. The 
ministers of the "three denominations of dissenters" — 
Presbyterians, Independents and Baptists — resident in 
London and the neighborhood, had the privilege ac- 
corded to them of presenting on proper occasions an 



110 ORIGIN OF THE BAPTIST CHURCH. 

address to the sovereign in state, a privilege which they 
still enjoy. 

It is unfortunate that modern Baptists have not 
carried out the principles of reform as proclaimed by 
the Baptists of the seventeenth century, who verged 
very close upon apostolic restoration; for we see in the 
history of the early Baptists that they, upon profession 
of faith, baptized believers into the one hody of Christ, 
and that, too, without postponement. The early Bap- 
tists depended upon the word of God as the source of 
enlightenment, regeneration and sanctification, and not 
on a "Christian experience" — not on special illumina- 
tion without the word of God — not on the mystic and 
twistic operations of an abstract Spirit, out of which 
theory of conversion have come, in the modern Baptist 
Church, illusions, hallucinations, sensuistic impressions, 
ecstasies, dreams and many other vagaries. The Bap- 
tists of the seventeenth century had a clearer perception 
of apostolic teaching, had a more comprehensive view 
or grasp of the scheme of redemption, and approxi- 
mated more nearly the New Testament order of things, 
than the modern school of Baptists, who have been 
spoiled by contact with pedobaptist "orthodoxy" — by 
contact with "Evangelical Churches" — whose smiles 
they court, and whose ill-will they seek to propitiate. 
The earlier Baptists did not baptize into the Baptist 
Church, as is the modern practice, but they baptized 
believing penitents "into the one body of Christ," 
which sounds exactly like apostolic teaching. We read 
of no monthly meetings called for the examination of 
converts who gave an "experience" of something that 
never occurred, except in the imagination of the con- 
vert; nor do we read that their "experience," wrought 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. Ill 

by the strivings of a "still small voice," was taken as 
an evidence of pardon; nor do we read of sinners being 
pardoned before immersion into the one body; nor do 
we learn from the records that they held monthly com- 
munion seasons, instead of communing on every first 
day of the week. 



THE BAPTIST CHURCH IN THE UNITED 

STATES. 



We continue our observations upon the origin and 
history of the Baptist Church. Some writers (as, for 
instance, Orchard, in his History of Foreign Baptists, 
London, 1838) have attempted to trace an uninterrupted 
succession of Baptist churches from the time of the 
apostles down to the present. He gives as the sum- 
ming up of his researches, that ''all Christian commun- 
ities during the first three centuries were of the Baptist 
denomination in constitution and practice. In the 
middle of the third century the Novation Baptists 
established separate and independent societies, which 
continued until the end of the sixth age, when these 
communities were succeeded by the Paterines, which 
continued until the Reformation (1517). The Oriental 
Baptist churches with their successors, the Paulicians, 
continued in their purity until the tenth century, when 
they visited France, resuscitating and extending the 
Christian profession in Languedoc, where they flour- 
ished till the crusading army scattered, or drowned in 
blood, one million of unoffending professors. The 
Baptists in Piedmont and Germany are exhibited as ex- 
isting under different names down to the Reformation. 
These churches, with their genuine successors, the 
Mennonites of Holland, are connectedly and chronolog- 
ically detailed to the present period/' 

We showed in a previous article that the Baptist 

(H2) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 113 

Church could not he traced heyond the sixteenth cen- 
tury, and that the Church, or sect rather, had its rise 
among the Anabaptists. As a contradiction of Orchard's 
assumptions Toe Christian Review (January, 1855, p. 
23), the leading Baptist Quarterly of America, speaks 
as follows : 

"We know of no assumption more arrogant, and 
more destitute of proper historic support, than that 
which claims to be able to trace the distinct and un- 
broken existence of a church substantially Baptist from 
the time of the apostles down to our own." Thus also 
Cutting {Historic Vindications, Boston, 1859, p. 14) 
remarks on such attempts: "I have little confidence in 
the results of any attempt of that kind which have met 
my notice, a*id I attach little value to inquiries pursued 
for the predetermined purpose of such a demonstra- 
tion." 

The Baptist churches in the United States owe their 
origin to Roger Williams, who, before his immersion, 
was an Episcopalian minister. He was persecuted for 
opposing the authority of the State in ecclesiastical 
affairs and for principles which' "tended to Anabap- 
tism." In 1639 he was immersed by Ezekiel Holliman, 
and in turn immersed Holliman and ten others, who 
with him organized a Baptist Church at Providence, 
Rhode Island. A few years before (1635), though un- 
known to Williams, a Baptist preacher of England, 
Hansard Knollys, had settled in New Hampshire and 
taken charge of a church in Dover: but he resigned in 
1639 and returned to England. Williams obtained in 
1644, a charter for the colony which he and his asso- 
ciates had founded in Rhode Island, with full and 
entire freedom of conscience. Rhode Island thus 
became the first Christian State which ever granted full 
religious liberty. In other British colonies the persecu- 
tion against the Baptists continued a long time. Mass- 
achusetts issued laws against them in 1644, imprisoned 
10 



114 THE BAPTIST CHURCH IN THE UNITED STATES. 

several Baptists in 1651, and banished others in 1669. 
In 1680, the doors of a Baptist meeting-house were 
nailed up. In New York laws were issued against 
them in 1662, in Virginia in 1664. With the beginning 
of the eighteenth century the persecution greatly abated. 
They were released from tithes in 1727 in Massachusetts, 
in 1729 in New Hampshire and Connecticut, but not 
before 1785 in Virginia. The spread of their principles 
was greatly hindered by these persecutions, especially 
in the South, where in 1776 they counted about one 
hundred societies. After the Revolution they spread 
with extraordinary rapidity, especially in the South and 
Southwest, and were inferior in this respect only to the 
Methodists. In 1817, a triennial general convention 
was organized, which, however, has since been discon- 
tinued. In 1845, the discussion of the slavery question 
led to a division of the Northern and Southern Baptists. 
The destruction of shivery, in consequence of the failure 
of the Great Rebellion and the adoption of the consti- 
tutional amendment in 1865, led to efforts to reunite 
the societies of the Northern and Southern States. 
The Northern associations generally expressed a desire 
to corporate again with the Southern brethren in the 
fellowship of Christian labor, but they demanded from 
the Southern associations a profession of loyalty to the 
United States Government, and they themselves deemed 
it necessary to repeat the testimony which, during the 
war, they had, at each annual meeting, borne against 
slavery. The Southern associations that met during 
the year 1865, were unanimously in favor of continuing 
their former separate societies, and against fraternizing 
with the Northern societies. They censured the Amer- 
ican Baptist Home Missionary Society for proposing, 
without consultation or co-operation w T ith the churches, 
associations, conventions or organized Boards of the 
Southern States, to appoint ministers and missionaries 
to preach and raise churches within the bounds of the 
Southern associations. Some of the Southern associa- 
tions, like that of Virginia, consequently advised the 
churches "to decline any co-operation or fellowship 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 115 

with any of the missionaries, ministers, or agents of the 
American Baptist Home Mission Society." A number 
of negro Baptist churches in the Southern States separ- 
ated from the Southern associations, and either connected 
themselves with those of the North, or organized, with 
the co operation of the Northern missionaries, inde- 
pendent associations. (McClintock and Strong's Bib. 
Theo., and Ec. Enc, vol. i. p. 654). 

In the United States the Baptist family is divided 
into the "Regular Baptists," or Missionary Baptists, 
Seventh-day Baptists, Anti-mission Baptists, Free- Will 
Baptists, and Six Principle Baptists. The Free or Open 
Communion Baptists, who were organized about 1810, 
united in 1841 with the Free- Will Baptists. 

The Baptists have no standard Confession of Faith. 
The congregation being independent as to govern- 
mental affairs, each adopts its own articles of belief. 
In England the " Old Connection" are chiefly Socin- 
ians; the "New Connection," evangelical Arminians; 
the "Particular Baptists," Calvinists of various shades. 
In the United States, the Regular Baptists are for the 
most part Calvinists. The Baptists generally form 
"Associations," which, however, exercise no jurisdic- 
tion over the churches. They recognize no higher 
church officers than pastors and deacons. Elders are 
sometimes ordained as evangelists and missionaries. 
Though Regular Baptists accept of no authority other 
than the Bible for their faith and practice, yet nearly all 
of the societies have a confession of faith in pamphlet 
form for distribution among its members. The "New 
Hampshire Confession of Faith," which contains nine- 
teen Articles, is more generally used among the societies 
in the North and East, while the " Philadelphia Confes- 
sion of Faith," which embodies twenty-five Articles, is 
the one generally adopted in the South. The American 



116 THE BAPTIST CHURCH IN THE I Nil ED STATEo. 

Baptist churches are more rigid on the question of " close 
communion" than are the British Baptist churches. 
The German Baptists of America, commonly known as 
Dunkers, but who denominate themselves Brethren, 
originated at Schwarzenan, in Germany, in 1708, were 
driven by persecution to America, between the years 
1719 and 1729. They purposely neglect any record of 
their proceedings, and are opposed to statistics, which 
they believe to foster pride. They originally settled in 
Pennsylvania, but are now most numerous in Ohio and 
Indiana. 

The regular Baptists, unlike most of the Protestant 
denominations, have no distinctive creed which is made 
a test of fellowship. They have, however, a "visible 
church" and an "invisible church," which duplex order 
of things, unlike the Church of Christ as founded by 
his apostles, is the source of much confusion and mys- 
ticism. The spiritual birth, as taught by Baptists, brings 
sinners into the " invisible church," while, at the same 
time, regenerated sinners in the "invisible church," can 
not come into the " visible church" — into the Baptist 
Church — until they are immersed ! To say the least, 
this is not New Testament teaching. Though Baptists 
may not intend it, this is a practical denial that baptism, 
as the consummating act in the divine process, is for the 
remission of sins — a positive contradiction of the words 
of the apostle Peter on the day of Pentecost. Baptists 
teach that sinners are directly illuminated and regener- 
ated by the special and mystic influence of the Holy 
Spirit, without the mediation of the Word of God, and 
that a special grace, not revealed in the gospel, is nec- 
essary to convict and convert the sinner. This is a prac- 
tical nullification of "the gospel" as " the power of God 
unto salvation to all them who believe. " They claim 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 117 

that by the direct regenerating influence of the Spirit, 
the convicted sinner is made conscious, without the test- 
imony of God's word, of the forgiveness of sins, and of 
justification, and of adoption into the family of God — 
into the " invisible church." He is called upon to give 
a " Christian experience," of what he saw and felt, as 
an evidence of pardon, thus setting aside the Word of 
Q-od, or the law of pardon in the gospel, as the only 
revealed evidence. The convert tells what the Lord has 
done for him through the strivings of the Spirit, and 
instead of relying on the testimonies of God's word for 
evidence of pardon, such as was preached by the apos- 
tles, he revels in dreams and fancies, and substitutes his 
feelings, called a " Christian experience," for the law of 
pardon, as proclaimed by the apostles in the name of 
Jesus Christ. 

According to such mystical teaching, the sinner is 
regenerated, born of God, saved, justified, sanctified, 
adopted, and made a child of God without the birth of 
baptism! And yet this alleged child of God — directly 
regenerated by the Holy Spirit, saved from his sins, 
justified, sanctified and adopted — can not enter the 
Baptist Church— the "visible church' 1 — until he is im- 
mersed! Here is the startling disclosure made that im- 
mersion is a "non-essential" in constituting a sinner a 
child of God — a citizen of the "invisible kingdom'' — but 
that in order to become a child in the Baptist family — a 
member in the "visible church" — immersion is made 
ver y essential! Such mystical teaching did not obtain 
in the apostolic church, and hence we have good reason 
for rejecting it. As neither Christ nor the apostles ever 
founded a Baptist Church, nor taught the direct agency 
of the Holy Spirit in the conversion of sinners, nor 
appointed "monthly meetings" where converts might 



118 THE BAPTIST CHURCH IN THE UNITED STATES. 

give the " experience " of their feelings as an evidence 
of pardon, nor appointed the celebration of the Lord's 
Supper but once a month, we reject all such theology as 
unscriptural and nou-apostolic. By such dreamy spec- 
ulation, and with no other evidence but the feelings of 
the misguided sinner, the Baptists contradict (through 
ignorance of the plan of salvation, it may be) the doc- 
trine that the Word of God is the "sword of the Spirit," 
which "kills and makes alive." Surely with such evi- 
dence before us, we dare not say that the Baptist Church 
is identical with the Church of Christ, which the apos- 
tles founded, and who made immersion into the name 
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 
essential to salvation, a doctrine which the Baptist 
Church ignores. 



ORIGIN OF METHODISM. 



John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, was born 
at Epworth, Lincolnshire, England, June 17, 1703. He 
was raised in the Church of England, was ordained a 
priest in 1728, by Bishop Potter, and died an Episco- 
palian. At the age of thirty -five he was scarcely known 
beyond the academic circles of Oxford. From child- 
hood he was deeply devout and religious and conscien- 
tious, which characteristics he inherited from a mother 
of superior endowments and of rare excellency of char- 
acter. His love of learning was very strong, and he 
was very studious at college, but "his poverty held him 
back from the costly vices which enslaved many of his 
college companions." It is said by one of his biograph- 
ers that his uncommonly fine traits of character, and 
his narrow, not to say marvelous, escape from the burn- 
ing rectory when he was six years of age, gave birth in 
the mind of his mother to an impression that this child 
was destined to an extraordinary career. She therefore 
consecrated him to Ood with special solemnity, resolv- 
ing " to be more particularly careful . . to instill into 
his mind the principles of religion and virtue." He 
received some of his first religious impressions while 
reading the Christian's Pattern, by Thomas a Kempis. 
The perusal of Law's Christian Perfection and Serious 
Call deepened these convictions, "and led him to devote 
himself, soul, body and substance, to the service of 

(119) 



120 ORIGIN OF METHODISM. 

God." "But, owing to his failure to comprehend the 
scriptural doctrine of salvation by faith only, he groped 
in the dark through thirteen years of ascetic self-denial, 
ritualistic observances, unceasing prayer, and works of 
charity, before he gained an assurance that God, for 
Christ's sake, had pardoned his sins." And his change 
of heart, "through those long, wearisome, comfortless 
years of seeking God without finding him," is thus re- 
lated : 

And when, on his voyage to Savannah (Ga.), he saw 
some pious Moravians rejoicing, while he was shaken 
with fears of death, amid the fury of a storm which 
apparently was driving them into the jaws of destruc- 
tion, he did not suspect that his fear was the fruit of 
his erroneous views. He talked much with some of the 
Moravian brethren after his arrival in Savannah; but it 
was not until after his return to England in 1738, that 
Peter Bolder, a Moravian preacher in London, after 
much conversation, aided by the testimonies of several 
living witnesses, convinced him that to gain peace of 
mind he must renounce that dependence upon his own 
works which had hitherto been the bane of his expe- 
rience, and replace it with a full reliance on the blood 
of Christ shed for him. To gain this faith he strove 
with all possible earnestness. And at a Moravian So- 
ciety meeting in Aldersgate Street, while one was read- 
ing Luther's statement of the change which God works 
in the heart through faith, Wesley says, "I felt my 
heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, 
Christ alone, for salvation; and an assurance was given 
me that he had taken away my sins, even mine, and 
saved me from the law of sin and death." (Rev. D. 
"Wise, D. D., in McClintock and Strong's fine, Vol. VI., 
p. 913.) 

In November, 1729, the Wesley brothers, Whitefield 
and their associates, about a dozen young men, students 
of Oxford University — formed themselves into a society 
for purposes of mutual moral and spiritual improve- 



REF0RMAT0R1 MOVEMENTS. 121 

ment. As members of the Church of England, which 
had lost all love of souls and all desire for spiritual life 
through formalism and ritualism, these young men 
sought to excite new life into a dead body, and to 
stimulate piety among a people where none existed. 
In view of the corrupt and lifeless condition of the 
Church of England, they voluntarily abandoned them- 
selves to a life of self-denial and personal consecration. 
By instructing the children of the neglected poor; by 
visiting the sick and the inmates of prisons and alms- 
houses ; by a strict observance of the fasts appointed 
by the Church, and by scrupulous exactness in their 
attendance upon public worship, they became objects 
of general notice. They were severely criticised and 
treated with contempt by their formalistic contempora- 
ries, and, as is usual in such cases, their sincerity called 
in question by mockers and scoffers. Even by their 
fellow-students they were called in turn, Sacramentarians, 
Bible-bigots, Bible-moths, the Godly Club. One, a student 
of Christ-Church College, with greater reverence than 
his fellows, and more learning, observed, in regard to 
their methodical manner of life, that a new sect of 
Methodists had sprung up, alluding to the ancient 
school of physicians known by that name. The appel- 
lation obtained currency, and although the title is still 
sometimes used reproachfully as expressive of enthu- 
siasm, or undue religious strictness, it has become the 
acknowledged designation of one of the largest bodies 
of religious people of modern times. 

''Wesley's idea at this time, and for many years after- 
wards," says Keats (History of the Free Churches of En- 
gland, p. 363), "was merely to revive the state of religion 
in the Church; but he knew enough of the condition 
of society in England, and of human nature, to be 
11 



122 ORIGIN OF METHODISM. 

aware that unless those who had been brought under 
the awakening influence of the gospel met together, 
and assisted each other in keeping alive the fire which 
had been lit in their hearts, it must, in many instances, 
seriously diminish, if not altogether die out," By this 
fact it will be seen that it was no part of the design of 
Wesley and his associates to found a new religious sect. 
"He considered them all members of the Church of 
England — zealous for her welfare, and loyal to her 
legitimate authorities." S<> says a Methodist authority, 
because such are the facts of history. 






ORIGIN OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL 

CHURCH. 



The Methodist Episcopal Church of the United States 
received its official title, as a distinct body, at what is 
historically known as the " Christian Conference," which 
began its sessions in Baltimore, on Friday, December 
24, 1784. The first Methodist service in America is 
supposed to have been held in the year 1766, in the city 
of New York, by Philip Embury, an Irish emigrant and 
local preacher, a carpenter by trade, who was moved 
thereto by the stirring appeals of Barbara Heck, an 
Irish woman, whose name is illustrious in the annals of 
the denomination. In the course of a year or two, their 
numbers had considerably increased, and they wrote to 
John Wesley requesting him to send them out some 
competent preachers. Two at once offered themselves 
for the work, Richard Boardman and Joseph Pilmoor, 
who were followed in 1771 by Francis Asbury and Rich- 
ard Wright. The agitations preceding the War of In- 
dependence, which soon afterwards broke out, inter- 
rupted the labors of the English Methodist preachers 
in America, all of whom, with the exception of Asbury, 
returned to England before the close of the year 1777; 
but their place appears to have been supplied by others 
of native origin, and they continued to prosper, so that, 
at the termination of the Revolutionary struggle, they 
numbered forty-three preachers and 13,740 members. 

(123) 



124 ORIGIN OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH. 

Up to this time, the American "Wesley an Methodists 
had laid no claim to being a distinct religious organiza- 
tion. Like Wesley himself, they regarded themselves 
as members of the English Episcopal Church, or rather 
of that branch of it then existing in this country, and 
their preachers as a body of irregular auxiliaries to the 
ordained clergy. It is said that "Episcopal churches 
are still standing in New York (or were but a few years 
since) and elsewhere, at whose altars Embury, Pilmoor, 
Boardman, Strawbridge, Asbury and Rankin, the earli- 
est Methodist preachers, received the holy communion." 
But the recognition of the United States as an inde- 
pendent country, and the difference of feeling and 
interests that necessarily sprung up between the con- 
gregations in America and those in England, rendered 
the formation of an independent society inevitable. 
Wesley became conscious of this, and met the emer- 
gency in a manner as bold as it was unexpected. 
Himself only a presbyter in the Church of England, he 
persuaded himself that in the primitive Church a pres- 
byter and a bishop were one and the same order, differ- 
ing only as to their official function, he, assuming the 
office of the latter, and, with the assistance of some 
other presbyters who had joined his movement, set 
apart and ordained Be v. Thomas Coke, D. C. L., of 
Oxford University, bishop of the infant church, Sep- 
tember 2, 1784. Coke immediately sailed for America, 
and appeared, with his credentials, at the Conference 
held at Baltimore, December 25th, of the same year. 
lie was unanimously recognized by the assembly of 
preachers, appointed Asbury coadjutor bishop, and or- 
dained several preachers to the offices of deacon and 
elder. Wesley also granted the preachers permission 
(which shows the extensive ecclesiastical power he 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 125 

wielded) to organize a separate and independent church 
under the Episcopal form of government: hence arose 
the "Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States 
of America." 

To facilitate the work of Coke and Asbury, Wesley 
furnished them with a "Sunday Service," or liturgy, a 
collection of songs and hymns, and also " The Articles 
of Religion," twenty-four of them, which he selected 
from the Thirty-nine Articles of the Book of Prayer, 
and which he revised for the benefit of the churches in 
the United States. Upon the arrival of Coke in 
America, accompanied by his ordained elders and dea- 
cons (he being ordained by Wesley " superintendent" — 
afterwards tortured into bishop), a special conference or 
convention of the itinerant preachers was summoned, 
and on the 24th of December, sixty of them assembled 
in the Lovely Lane Chapel in the city of Baltimore. 
Dr. Coke took the chair, and presented the following 
letter from Wesley, written eight days after the ordina- 
tions, and tersely stating the grounds of what he had 
done, and advised. As this letter contains the pith of 
Episcopal Methodism, we give it entire: 

To Dr. Coke, Mr. Asbury, and our Brethren in North 
America : 

By a very numerous train of providences, many of 
the provinces of North America are totally disjoined 
from their mother country, and erected into independ- 
ent States. The English government has no authority 
over them, either civil or ecclesiastical, any more than 
over the States of Holland. A civil authority is exer- 
cised over them, partly by the Congress and partly by 
the provincial assemblies; but no one either exercises 
or claims any ecclesiastical authority at all. In this 
peculiar situation, some thousands of the inhabitants 
of these States desire my advice; and in compliance 
with their desire, I have drawn up a little sketch. 



126 ORIGIN OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH. 

Lord King's account of the Primitive Church, con- 
vinced me, many years ago, that bishops and presbyters 
are of the same order, and consequently have the same 
right to ordain. For many years I have been impor- 
tuned, from time to time, to exercise this right, by 
ordaining part of our traveling preachers. But I have 
still refused, not only for peace' sake, but because I was 
determined as little as possible to violate the established 
order of the National Church, to which I belonged. 

But the case is widely different between England and 
North America. Here there are bishops who have a 
legal jurisdiction. In America there are none, neither 
any parish ministers: so that for some hundred miles 
together there is none either to baptize or to administer 
the Lord's Supper. Here, therefore, my scruples are at 
an end, and I conceive myself at full liberty, as I violate 
no order and invade no man's right, by appointing and 
sending laborers into the harvest. 

I have accordingly appointed Dr. Coke and Mr. 
Francis Asbury to be joint superintendents over our 
brethren in North America, as also Richard Whatcoat 
and Thomas Vasey to act as elders among them, by 
baptizing and administering the Lord's Supper. And I 
prepared a liturgy little differing from that of the Church 
of England (I think, the best constituted national church 
in the world), which I advise all the traveling preachers 
to use on the Lord's Day in all the congregations, read- 
ing the litany only on Wednesdays and Fridays, and 
praying extempore on all other days. I also advise the 
the elders to administer the Supper of the Lord on every 
Lord's Day. 

If any one will point out a more rational and scrip- 
tural way of feeding and guiding those poor sheep in 
the wilderness, I will gladly embrace it. At present I 
can not see any better method than I have taken. 

It has, indeed, been proposed to desire the English 
bishops to ordain part of our preachers for America; 
but to this I object: (1) I desired the bishop of Lon- 
don to ordain only one ; but could not prevail. (2) If 
they consented, we know the slowness of their proceed- 
ings; but the matter admits of no delay. (3) If they 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 127 

would ordain them now, they would likewise expect to 
govern them; and how grievously would this entangle 
us! (4) As our American brethren are now totally dis- 
entangled, both from the State and the English hie- 
rarchy, we dare not entangle tliern again, either with the 
one or the other. They are now at full liberty simply 
to follow the Scriptures and the Primitive Church. And 
we judge it best that they should stand in that liberty 
wherewith God has so strangely made them free. 

After the reading and consideration of this document, 
it was, without a single dissenting voice, regularly and 
formally "agreed to form a Methodist Episcopal Church, 
in which the liturgy (as presented by Rev. John Wes- 
ley) should be read, and the sacraments be administered 
by a superintendent, elders and deacons, who shall be 
ordained by a Presbytery, using the Episcopal form, as 
prescribed in Rev. Mr. Wesley's Prayer-book;" or, in 
the language of the Minutes of the Conference, "follow- 
ing the counsel of Mr. John Wesley, who recommended 
the Episcopal mode of government, we thought it best 
to become an Episcopal Church, making the Episcopal 
office elective, and the elected superintendent or bishop 
amenable to the body of ministers and preachers." 

Wesley was an Episcopalian, and thoroughly believed 
in the Episcopal form of church government. U I firmly 
believe," he said, "I am a scriptural Ejpiscojpos, as much 
as any man in England or in Europe;" but he did not 
believe in an "uninterrupted succession." When he 
ordained Coke a k ' superintendent," he ordained him a 
bishop. He objected to the title as it was used in the 
English Church, but did not object to the thing itself. 
He was opposed to the abuse of the office, not the use 
of it. At any rate, the Episcopacy of the English 
Church was incorporated into the Methodist Church of 
America, with three orders of clergy, viz.: bishops, 
elders and deacons. 



WESLEY NOT A METHODIST. 



Like Luther, Zwingle, Calvin and Knox, Wesley 
never made any attempt to return to apostolic practice, 
nor did either of these reformers even suggest the idea 
of reproducing the Church of Christ as established by 
the apostles. They simply aimed to re-form existing 
ecclesiastical institutions. As to Wesley, he desired to 
re-form the Church of England by vitalizing and spirit- 
ualizing its priesthood, and by arousing the activities 
of its membership ; and, as respected his work in 
America, as we have already seen, it is very evident 
that he sought, with the tact and diplomacy of a crafty 
statesman, to adjust the Church of England to the pe- 
culiar political condition of the government of the 
United States — to a republican form of government as 
contrasted with a kingly government. He was a shrewd 
manager in politico-ecclesiastical affairs. He was a 
proficient in the study of adaptations of means to the 
consummation of proposed measures, and it is a note- 
worthy fact that, up to this day, the same spirit of 
diplomacy — the same spirit of accommodation to sur- 
rounding influences — pervades the entire fabric of the 
Methodist Episcopal Church. That Wesley was well 
acquainted with New Testament teaching, and apostolic 
practice, is a fact made evident in his Explanatory Notes 
upon the New Testament, in his Doctrinal Tracts, and in 
his letters of instructions to the churches. Indeed, so 

(128) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 129 

vigorously did he advocate baptism for remission of sins 
in his Doctrinal Tracts, that a good deal of what he said 
upon that subject has been expunged in the latest edi- 
tions, if the work itself has not been entirely suppressed. 
In his letter "to Dr. Coke, Mr. Asbury, and our breth- 
ren in North America," which we reproduced in a pre- 
vious article, he " advises the elders to admiuistej the 
Supper of the Lord on every Lord's Day" (which sounds 
very apostolic), and leaves them " at full liberty simply 
to follow the Scriptures and the Primitive Church" (which 
also sounds very apostolic). And it looks very apos- 
tolic when we quote and read the following words from 
the Preface of his "New Testament Notes:" "Would 
to God that all the party names, and unscriptural phrases 
and forms, which have divided the Christian world, were 
forgot; and that we might all sit down together, as humble, 
loving disciples, at the feet of our common Master, to hear 
his word, to imbibe his spirit, and to transcribe his life into 
our own." 

The case of John Wesley is but another illustration 
of the fact that a man may, as a scholar and as an hon- 
est interpreter of historical facts, acknowledge and ad- 
vocate the truth, wdiile at the same time his judgment 
is swayed by ecclesiastical associations, and by a love 
of some particular form of theology, or by self-interest, 
which not unfrequently outweighs all considerations for 
the unity and peace of the Church of Christ. When 
we open histories, and read the works of commentators, 
and examine the critical and exegetical authorities of 
educated men, we are made to rejoice at the unanimity 
with which they all speak of apostolic precedent and 
practice, and to rejoice in the hope that the restoration 
of apostolic Christianity will soon become an accom- 
plished fact; but when we take a survey of the religious 



130 WESLEY NOT A METHODIST. 

situation, and see the persistent efforts put forth by the 
various Protestant denominations to maintain eccle- 
siastical distinctions, and to support antagonistic creeds, 
and to apologize for divisions, we utterly despair of 
realizing the unity ot Christians upon the basis of the 
Bible. Concerning the views of Wesley on church gov- 
ernment, we here produce one who is competent to speak. 
Says Dr. Curry, of the Christian Advocate (New York, 
May 25, 1871) : 

No fact respecting the history of John Wesley is more 
clearly manifest than that he was always a strenuous 
supporter of the authority of the Established Church 
of England. He jealously regarded the exclusive eccle- 
siastical authority of that Church in all that he did as 
an evangelist, and seemed always determined that while 
he lived and ruled — and it was always understood that 
he would rule as long as he lived — nothing should be tol- 
erated in his societies at all repugnant to the sole and 
exclusive ecclesiastical authority of the Established 
Church. This rule was applied to his societies in Amer- 
ica before the Revolution just as strictly as to those in 
England. But the political separation of America from 
Great Britain, as it also ended the authority of the En- 
glish Church in this country, made it lawful, according 
to his theory of the case, for the Methodist societies in 
America to become regularly organized churches. 

The theological tenets and dogmas of Wesleyan 
Methodism, with perhaps two or three modifications, 
are the same as those which, by common consent, are 
at present deemed "evangelical" or "orthodox." The 
articles of religion drawn up by Wesley for his imme- 
diate followers, and substantially adopted by all Meth- 
odist bodies since, are but slightly modified from those 
of the Established Church of England. The sermons 
of John Wesley, and his notes on the New Testament, 
are recognized by his followers in Great Britain and 
America as the standard of Methodism, and as the basis 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 131 

of their theological creed. There are, according to 
McClintock and Strong's Encyclopaedia, about nine sub- 
divisions of the Methodist body in the old country, viz: 
the Wesleyan Methodists; the Calvinistic Methodists; 
the Wesleyan Methodist E"ew Connection; the Band- 
Room Methodists; the Primitive Methodists; the Byran- 
ites, or Bible Christians; the Primitive Methodists of 
Ireland; the Protestant Methodists; the Wesleyan Meth- 
odist Association; the Reformers; the Wesleyan Reform 
Union. In the United States, we have the Methodist 
Episcopal Church ; the Methodist Episcopal Church, 
South; the Wesleyan Methodist Church; the African 
Methodist Episcopal Church; the African Methodist 
Episcopal (Zion) Church; the United Brethren in Christ, 
sometimes called German Methodists; the Evangelical 
Association ; the Free Methodist Church ; the Colored 
Methodist Church, besides a few others of less signif- 
icance. According to the apostle Paul, all this is "car- 
nal," and not "spiritual." "The unity of the faith" is 
not found in all these divisions and subdivisions. The 
apostles of the Lamb never founded one of these. They 
have all originated within a little over a hundred years. 
As distinct organizations, they are all of the "earth, 
earthy." They are all founded upon the opinions and 
speculations and dreams of men, and the mark of the 
beast is impressed upon them all. At the Pan-Presby- 
terian Convocation, held in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1877, 
Dr. Bailie declared that there were "forty branches ot 
the Presbyterian family" in existence, but he failed to 
tell that "the trail of the Serpent is over them all." 
In making these remarks, we speak not of good men 
and women, and of intelligent and philanthropic men 
and women, in them all; but we speak of the systems 
of theology and of the distinct ecclesiastical organiza- 



132 WESLEY NOT A METHODIST. 

tions, which these bodies represent, as wickedly sectarian, 
and as a burning disgrace to the Author of Christianity. 
None of these sects originated under apostolic teach- 
ing, none of them can be dated beyond the sixteenth 
century; and hence, as misrepresenting the Church of 
Christ, which the apostles founded, we reject them all. 
The Methodist theology advocates "justification by 
faith alone," and the preachers of that distinctive the- 
ology tell us that it is a doctrine very "full of comfort," 
when at the same time, be it known, that there is no 
such doctrine in the word of God. What they call jus- 
tification by faith alone, is justification by sensuous 
feeling — an ecstasy, an illusion, a dream, a vain imagi- 
nation, the delights of animal magnetism — which they 
tell us is wrought directly by the mystic impulse of the 
Holy Spirit, without illumination and conviction by the 
testimonies of God's word. The Methodist Church 
make baptism a " non-essential" to salvation, thus di- 
rectly insulting the Author of the Plan of Salvation, 
and substituting human expediency for divine law. 
The Methodist Episcopal system not only lodges legis- 
lative authority in a bench of Bishops — in a General 
Conference — where they make and unmake rules and 
regulations to suit the varying conditions of the cap- 
tious and exacting world, and where they devise how 
to catch the tide of good fortune and ride out upon the 
wave of popular applause, but imitating the example 
of Romanism, it transgresses the laws of God, changes 
the ordinance, and breaks the everlasting covenant. 
(Isaiah xxiv. 5.) The Episcopal system, wherever 
found, whether in the Roman Catholic Missal, the 
Augsburg Confession of Faith, the Heidelberg Confes- 
sion of Faith, the Westminster Confession, or in the 
Book of Prayer, or in the Methodist Discipline, recog- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 133 

nizes infant church-membership as the corner-stone of 
every pedobaptist edifice. And, setting aside immer- 
sion, as practiced by the apostles, and which by the 
whole world of learning has been conceded to have 
been the exclusive practice of the Primitive Church, 
these innovators upon God's Plan of Salvation have 
substituted rantism and affusion; and they have the 
effrontery to tell the sinful world that sprinkling and 
pouring serve the same purpose as immersion, if " only 
the heart is right" — as if wicked men could have a 
heart right in the sight of God while rejecting the posi- 
tive commands of the Son of God! And where did the 
"Mourning Bench" system of regeneration come from? 
Why, it is hardly fifty years of age. President Finney, 
of Oberlin College, in his book on "Revivals," issued 
within the last thirty years, was the first man who had 
the courage to proclaim from the house-tops that the 
"mourning bench" was intended to take the place of 
baptism! Viewed from the angle of apostolic teaching, 
we surely find no reformation in all this; on the other 
hand, we only see Reformation. We find that the 
Methodist Discipline is but a modification of the Epis- 
copal Book of Prayer, and that the Book of Prayer is 
only a modification of the Roman Catholic Missal, 
which had its origin in the latter part of the fifth cen- 
tury. All these creed-formularies are but the product 
of the Dark Ages. 

The Episcopalian form of church government, whether 
found in the Romish Church, or in the Church of En- 
gland, or in the Methodist Episcopal Church, or, if you 
please, in the Mormon Church, is to all intents and 
purposes a spiritual despotism, possessing not the least 
semblance to the apostolic order of things. Luther at- 
tempted to reform the Romish Church by striking at 



134 WESLEY NOT A METHODIST. 

the rottenness of the Romish priesthood, and failed; 
Zwingle also failed in the same direction; Calvin at- 
tempted to reform the Romish Church by denouncing 
the false theological dogmas of that Church, and failed; 
Knox, by herculean blows, undertook to reform the 
despotic government of the Church of Rome, and 
failed; Henry VIII. made a compromise between Rom- 
anism and Protestantism, and produced the Established 
Church of England; Wesley essayed to reform the 
Church of England, and produced — the Methodist 
Episcopal Church! It is utterly impossible to identify 
any of the so-called Protestant Churches with the 
Church of Christ as established by his apostles. Every 
one of them is defective, either in doctrine or in gov- 
ernment; and, being defective in some part, and there- 
fore antagonistic to the authority of Jesus Christ, we 
accept neither the one nor the other. Remove the 
Pope from the Romish Church, and the system falls to 
pieces, because the Papacy is the center of unity in that 
body. Remove Episcopacy from the Church of En- 
gland, and that Church falls to pieces, because Episco- 
pacy is its center of unity. Remove Episcopacy from 
the Methodist Episcopal Church, and that ecclesiastical 
edifice falls into detached fragments, because the power 
w r hich is lodged in the Twelve Bishops, and which 
power is exerted through the General Conference, 
denotes the center of unity in that body. What we 
propose, is unity in Jesus Christ, the Head of the 
Church — the Head of the One Body. And this unity 
never can be effected, if we must carry with us the 
trumpery of creeds and confessions, the ecclesiastical 
lumber of the Dark Ages, the dogmas and traditions 
and speculations of fallible men. We must unload all 
these, and dump them into the mystic stream of 



[REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 135 

Babylon, ana let them forever disappear beneath the 
waves of dark oblivion. The sects of Christendom are 
all adrift because they do not make Christ the center of 
unity — because they do not "keep the unity of the 
Spirit in the bond of peace," and because they do not 
strive to bring all men "into the unity of the faith, and 
of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a, perfect man, 
to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ:" 
which all lovers of the truth should do, "that we 
henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and 
carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the slight 
of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in 
wait to deceive; but speaking the truth in love, may 
grow up into him in all things, which is the Head, even 
Christ: from whom the whole body, fitly joined to- 
gether, and compacted by the service of every joint 
[Macknight], according to its energy, in the proportion 
of each particular part, effects the increase of the body, 
for the edification of itself in love." (Eph. iv.) 



THE REFORMATION OF THE NINETEENTH 

CENTURY. 



Thomas Campbell came from Scotland to the United 
States in May, 1807, and his son Alexander landed in 
New York, September 9, 1809. They both settled in 
Washington County, Pa. When Thomas Campbell 
landed in Philadelphia, he found the Seceder Synod in 
session, and, upon presenting his credentials, he was 
cordially received, aud at once assigned by this Synod 
to the Presbytery of Chartiers in Western Pennsylvania. 
Both father and son were educated from childhood in 
the Westminster Confession of Faith. 

When the Campbells landed on the shores of Amer- 
ica, they found the various denominations in a deplor- 
able condition, and the Presbyterian "branches" were, 
if anything, more powerless, as spiritual agencies, than 
any other "branch of the Church." All around, as they 
viewed the religious horizon, and as they gazed upon 
broken ranks of fiery zealots, they saw nothing but dis- 
sension and disunion. Bigotry, party intolerance, and 
sectarian selfishness, were everywhere phenomenal of 
divided churches, and of distracted members. Infidelity 
— gross infidelity — was fattening and waxing wanton on 
the spoils of an inglorious conquest. The aspect of re- 
ligious affairs was dark and gloomy in the extreme. 
The great soul of Thomas Campbell was moved within 
him when he saw that the whole land was given over to 

(136) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 137 

the idolatrous worship of opinions, speculative theology, 
scholastic dogmas and men-made creeds, and to visions 
and dreams, and to mysticism and dreary superstition. 
He saw that where there is "no vision" — no divine rev- 
elation — the "people perish," for want of spiritual food. 
In the fearfully distracted condition of things, he saw 
the immediate necessity of providing an antidote, and 
that antidote was to he found in pleading for Christian 
union, in making an effort to remove all barriers, and 
in a determination to unite all hearts, if possible, upon 
the Word of God, as the only solvent of an intolerable 
evil. While yet in Scotland, the Campbells, and espe- 
cially Thomas (for Alexander was not yet out of his 
teens), were impressed with the necessity and desirability 
of discussing Christian union by an appeal to the Word 
of God, and this necessity and desirability was impress- 
ed upon his mind by the "Haldanean reformation" in 
that country — inaugurated by Robert and J. A. Haldane 
— and by reading the discussions of such eminent In- 
dependents as Archibald McLean, Alexander Carson, 
William Jones, David Dale and Greville Ewing. Simul- 
taneous with the movement of the Campbells in Wash- 
ington County, Pa., there was a similar movement in 
Kentucky, led by a man of pronounced abilities, Barton 
W. Stone, whose movement for reform was subsequent- 
ly absorbed in the stronger movement of the Campbells. 
Thomas Campbell was witness to the severe contest, 
in the old country, between Presbyterianism and Prelacy, 
and was conversant with the history of the Covenanters, 
Seceders, Relief Church, Burghers, Anti Burghers, Old 
and Xew Light Burghers and Anti Burghers — all of 
which parties, in the right of private judgment and per- 
sonal liberty, were trying to extricate themselves from 
the thralldom of Romanism, and from the clutches of a 
12 



138 REFORMATION OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 

proud and imperious Prelacy. There was a pandemo- 
nium of sectism at the time the Campbells attempted a 
reformation of the Seceder Church, in the Presbytery 
of Chartiers; the Bible was a dead letter and inoperative 
among the people; the consciences of church commu- 
nicants were fettered with Creeds and Confessions of 
Faith; the masses were ignorant of the Word of God; 
the ciergy seemed to be absolutely ignorant of the rules 
of Bible interpretation; the various sects were quarrel- 
ing and fighting over party shibboleths, and ungodly 
rivalry existed among the Protestant denominations; 
a line of distinction was clearly marked between the 
"clergy and the laity;" the denominations were all lost 
to the apostolic order of things. 

The Seceder congregations in Washington County 
were much pleased with the accession of Thomas Camp- 
bell to their ministry, to whom they became strongly at- 
tached. His high order of talents rendered him very pop- 
ular among the people. Soon, however, suspicions began 
to arise in the minds of his ministerial brethren that he 
was too much disposed to relax the rigidness of their ec- 
clesiastical rules, and to cherish for sister denominations 
feelings of good will and fraternity in which they were 
unwilling to share. They watched his movements with 
jaundiced eyes, and avoided him with ill concealed feel- 
ings of envy, because he went among the destitute, who 
had for a long time been deprived of the ministrations of 
the gospel, and administered the Lord's Supper to other 
branches of the Presbyterian family. Mr. Wilson, a 
young minister, at the first meeting of the Presbytery, 
laid the case before it in the usual form of "libel," 
containing various formal and specified charges, the 
chief of which were that Mr. Campbell had failed to 
inculcate strict adherence to the church standard and 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 139 

usages, and that lie had even expressed his disapproval 
of some things contained in said standard. Placed 
upon the defensive, he was somewhat guarded and con- 
ciliatory in his replies. His pleadings in behalf of 
Christian liberty and common fraternity were in vain, 
and his appeals to the Bible were wholly disregarded; 
and though he persisted that he had violated no precept 
of the Sacred Volume, the Presbytery finally found him 
deserving of censure for not adhering to the ''Secession 
Testimony." Against this decision Thomas Campbell 
protested, and his case was, not long afterward, sub- 
mitted to the first meeting of the Synod. In the mean- 
time, he was apprised of the fact that many of his fellow- 
ministers had become inimical to him through the influ- 
ence of those who conducted the prosecution ; and 
knowing well that it was impossible for him, with his 
views of the Bible, and of the right of private judg- 
ment, he clearly perceived that if the Synod should 
sanction the decision of the Presbytery, he must at once 
cease to be a minister in the Seceder branch of the Pres- 
byterian family. Anxious to avoid a collision which 
might prove detrimental to his usefulness, and which 
might excite discord and alienation, and still cherishing 
the desire to co-operate with those with whom he had 
been so long associated, he addressed an earnest appeal 
to the Synod, which was to be presented to that august 
body at its first meeting. The appeal was addressed, 
4 'To the Associate Synod of North America." That 
the reader may judge of the animus of this " appeal," 
and get an idea of the incipient stages of the great 
reformatory movement, which, in the course of time, 
was destined to shake the whole religious world, we 
make the following extract : 

Is it, therefore, because I plead the cause of scriptural 



140 REFORMATION OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 

and apostolic worship of the Church, in opposition to 
the various errors and schisms which have so awfully 
corrupted and divided it, that the brethren of the Union 
should feel it difficult to admit me as their fellow-laborer 
in that blessed work? I sincerely rejoice with them in 
what they have done in that way; but still, all is not 
yet done; and surely they can have no objections to go 
further. Nor do I presume to dictate to them or to 
others as to how they should proceed for the glorious 
purpose of promoting the unity and purity of the 
Church; but only beg leave, for my own part, to walk 
upon such pure and peaceable ground that I may have 
nothing to do with'human controversy, about the right 
or wrong side of any opinion whatsoever, by simply 
acquiescing in what is written, as quite sufficient for 
every purpose of faith and duty; and thereby to influ- 
ence as many as possible to depart from human contro- 
versy, to betake themselves to the Scriptures, and, in so 
doing, to the study and practice of faith, holiness and 
love. And all this without any intention on my part 
to judge or despise my Christian brethren who may not 
see with my eyes in those things which, to me, appear 
indispensably necessary to promote and secure the unity, 
peace and purity of the Church. Say, brethren, what 
is my offense, that I should be thrust out from the her- 
itage of the Lord, or from serving him in that good 
work to which he has been graciously pleased to call 
me? For what error or immorally ought I to be reject- 
ed, except it be that I refuse to acknowledge as obliga- 
tory upon myself, or to impose upon others, anything 
as of Divine obligation for which. I can not produce a 
"Thus saith the Lord?" This, I am sure, I can do, while 
I keep by his own word; but not quite so sure when I 
substitute my own meaning or opinion, or that of others, 
instead thereof. 

In the same "appeal," he says: "And I hope it is 
no presumption to believe that saying and doing the 
very same things that are said and done before our eyes 
on the sacred page, is infallibly right, as well as all- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 141 

sufficient for the edification of the Church, whose duty 
and perfection is to be in all things conformed to the 
original standard." After the reading of this protest, 
aud the hearing of the case before the Synod, it was 
decided that "there were such informalities in the pro- 
ceedings of the Presbytery in the trial of the case as to 
afford sufficient reason to the Synod to set aside their 
judgment and decision, and to release the protester 
from the censure inflicted by the Presbytery" — which 
they accordingly did. After this, the charges which 
had been before the Presbytery, with all the papers 
pertaining to the trial, were referred to a committee, 
who finally reported as follows: 

"Upon the whole, the committee are of opinion that 
Mr. Campbell's answers to the two first articles of 
charge are so evasive and unsatisfactory, and highly 
equivocal upon great and important articles of revealed 
religion, as to give ground to conclude that he has ex- 
pressed sentiments very different upon these articles, 
and from the sentiments held and professed by this 
Church, and are sufficient grounds to infer censure." 

"From this extreme reluctance to separate from the 
Seceders, for many of whom, both preachers and people, 
he continued to cherish sentiments of Christian regard, 
Mr. Campbell was induced to submit to this decision, 
handing in at the same time a declaration 'that his sub- 
mission should be understood to mean no more, on his 
part, than an act of deference to the judgment of the 
court, that, by so doing, he might not give offense to 
his brethren by manifesting a refractory spirit.' After 
this concession, Mr. Campbell fondly hoped that the 
amicable relations formerly existing between him and 
the Presbytery of Chartiers would be restored, and that 
he would be permitted to prosecute his labors in peace. 
In this, however, he soon found himself mistaken, and 



142 REFORMATION OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 

discovered, with much regret, that the hostility of his 
opponents had been only intensified by the issue of the 
trial, and was more undisguised than ever. Misrepre- 
sentations and calumny were employed to detract from 
his influence; a constant watch was placed over his 
proceedings, and he discovered that even spies were 
employed to attend his meetings, in order, if possible, 
to obtain fresh grounds of accusation against him." 
(Memoirs of A. Campbell, Vol. I. pp. 229-30). 

Forbearance, under such circumstances, finally ceased 
to be a Christian virtue, and, having a thousand times 
more reverence for the word of God than for the selfish 
sectarian decrees of Synods and Presbyteries, his self- 
respect compelled him to secede from the Seceders, and 
accordingly he presented to the Synod a formal renun- 
ciation of its authority, announcing that he now 
abandoned "all ministerial connection" with it, and 
would hold himself thenceforth " utterly unaffected bv 
its decisions." His withdrawal from the persecuting 
Seceders produced no interruption in his ministerial 
labors. Continuing to advocate toleration of private 
judgment and Christian union upon the basis of the 
Bible, the people in large numbers continued to follow 
him up, and to eagerly listen to his powerful pleas^ 
wherever it was in his power to hold meetings — in 
school -houses, in maple groves, or in private houses. 
Tm view of the unsettled condition of religious affairs, 
Mini with a sincere desire to form a union upon the 
Bible alone, he proposed to the honest and conscien- 
tious persons of the Presbyterian congregations that a 
^oecial meeting should be held in order to an inter- 
change of sentiments upon the existing state of things, 
and to give, if possible, more distinctness to the 
movement in which they had thus far been co-operating 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 143 

without any determinate arrangement. Up to this 
time, no separation from the religious denominations 
had been contemplated — no separate bond of union had 
been suggested; nor was there the remotest allusion to 
the formation of a new religious party. On the con- 
trary, Thomas Campbell only desired to abolish sectism, 
and he labored to induce the different religious denomi- 
nations to unite upon the Bible as the only authorized 
rule of faith and practice. His heart sickened at the 
sight of partyism, and he urged, with all the energy of 
his great intellect, that all religious parties should desist 
from shameful controversies about matters of mere 
opinion and expediency. Having separated himself 
from the Seceder branch, Mr. Campbell was soon sur- 
rounded by a large number of godly and intelligent 
persons, who, like himself, were disheartened with the 
evils growing out of sectarian envy and rivalry, and 
who were willing to unite with him in an effort to 
make the word of God the final appeal. 



ATTEMPTS AT REFORMATION. 



In our last article we made reference to a meeting 
called by Thomas Campbell, the specific object of 
which was to determine the course to be pursued by 
those who had separated themselves from the trammels 
of ecclesiasticism and from the domination of a perse- 
cuting Presbyterian priesthood, and from the delibera- 
tions of which meeting we date the origin of the plea 
for a return to apostolic teaching and practice. It is 
our purpose to acquaint our readers with the facts 
which gave rise to the reformatory movement of the 
nineteenth century, and to furnish the reasons of separa- 
tion from all the ecclesiastical establishments of modern 
times. We have already traced out the origin of the 
Protestant sects, the origin of Protestant creedism, and 
have connectedly shown how one sect has grown out of 
another sect, and bow one creed has succeeded another 
creed. When Thomas Campbell began his reformation, 
or when he first made his attempt to reform the Seceder 
Church, in which he held membership, lie found the 
religious world in universal chaos. He saw no way out 
of this chaos, and discovered no basis of Christian 
union, except in the abandonment of all creedism, and 
in a complete restoration of the apostolic order of 
things. 

The time for solemn consultation had arrived. There 
was a large assembly of interested people, all of whom 
seemed to feel the importance of the occasion, and to 

(144) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 145 

realize the responsibilities of their new religious atti- 
tude. A deep feeling of solemnity pervaded the 
assembly. The divine guidance was invoked, every 
heart seemed to be tilled with prayerful solicitude, and 
all seemed to seek for that wisdom which comes from 
above. Thomas Campbell rehearsed the great question 
from the beginning. With unusual force he deplored 
the shameful existence of religious divisions, and mourned 
the desolations of Zion, and deprecated the ungodly ri- 
valries of n^htins: sects. lie called attention to the 
word of God as the infallible standard of spiritual 
truth, and as an all-sufficient guide in the Christian life, 
and as furnishing the only basis of Christian union ; nd 
co-operation. He alluded to the departures that had 
been taken from the Sacred Volume, and how evil- 
minded men had substituted theories, speculations, opin- 
ions and human dogmas i'^v the simplicity of the gospel 
of Christ, and b.)W the Bible was set aside to make 
room for philosophical abstractions, and for all sorts of 
fancies and conceits. As the only means or' removing 
all these evils, he insisted with great earnestness upon a 
radical return to the simple teachings of the holy 
Scriptures, and for an entire rejection of everything in 
the Christian world for which there c mid not he pro- 
duced a Divine warrant. Finally, after thoroughly 
reviewing the premises which he and his friends occu- 
pied in the proposed reformation, he proceeded to 
announce, in the most simple and emphatic terms, the 
great regulating principle or rule which w;is intended 
to be the accepted guide of their future actions. "That 
rule, my highly respected hearers," said he in conclu- 
sion, "is this, that where the Scriptures speak, we 
speak; and wfter-e the Scriptures are silent, we are 

SILENT " 
13 



146 ATTEMPTS AT REPC RMATION. 

Upon the enunciation of this supreme rule of action, 
a solemn silence pervaded the assembly, and thrilled 
with strange emotions every heart. They saw at a 
glance the vexatious problem solved, and in a manner 
so simple and rudimental, that it appeared to them like 
a new revelation. Here, now, at length, was an end put 
to all their doubts. The path of duty was now made 
clear. Here was the solvent of all religious strife. En- 
couragement seized every heart, and joy lighted up every 
eye, because, from heuceforth, they were to take God 
at his word, and from this time forth they were to rely 
exclusively upon apostolic precept and example. All 
religious teaching, which consisted in remote inferences, 
fanciiul interpretation**, speculative theories, and in false 
rules of interpretation, was forever to be discarded — a 
consumniai ion never attempted either by Luther, Zwing- 
le, Calvin, Wesley, or by any other Protestant reformer. 
Whatever private opinions men might entertain in re- 
gard to matters not clearly revealed, must be reserved 
as private property, and niu<t not be imposed on any 
one as a test of loyalty and Christian fraternity. The 
silence of the Bible must be respected equally with its 
positive an I unquestioned revelations, which, by divine 
authority, were declared to be able to "make the man 
of God perfect, and thoroughly iurnished unto every 
ffood work." 

After Mr. Campbell finished his remarkable address, 
he called up"ii those present f<>r a fwa and candid ex- 
pression of their views. After an interval of some con- 
siderable time, the dead silence was broken by a shrewd 
Scotch Seceder, Andrew Munro, a bookseller and post- 
master at (amonsburg, who arose and said: u Mr. Camp- 
bell, if we adopt that as a basis, then there is an end of 
infant baptism." This remark produced a profound 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 147 

sensation. "Of course," remarked Mr. Campbell, "if 
infant baptism be not found in Scripture, we can have 
nothing to do with it." Upon this, Thomas Acheson, 
of Washington, arose, greatly excited, and, advancing 
a short distance, exclaimed, laying his hand upon his 
heart: "I hope I may never see the day when my heart 
will renounce that blessed saying of the Scripture, 'Suf- 
fer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not; 
for of such is the kingdom of heaven.'" Upon saying 
this he was so much affected that he burst into tears, 
and while a deep sympathetic feeling pervaded the en- 
tire assembly, he was about to retire to an adjoining 
room, when James Foster, not willing that this misap- 
plication of Scripture should pass unchallenged, cried 
out: " Mr. Acheson, I would remark that in the portion 
of Scripture you have quoted, there is no reference what- 
ever to infant baptism." Without offering a reply, Mr. 
Acheson passed out to weep alone; "but this incident," 
says Prof. Richardson, in his Memoirs of A. Campbell, 
"while it foreshadowed some of the trials which the 
future had in store, failed to abate, in the least, the con- 
fidence which the majority of those present placed in 
the principles to which they were committed. The rule, 
which Mr. Campbell had announced, seemed to cover 
the whole ground, and to be so obviously just and 
proper, that after further discussion and conference it 
was adopted with apparent unanimity, no valid objec- 
tions being urged against it." 



THE WORD OF GOD THE SOLE RULE OF 

ACTION. 



The rule of action adopted in that humble and ob- 
scure meeting was destined to revolutionize the religious 
world. " Where the Scriptures speak, we speak; where 
these are silent, we are silent" is a sentiment that not 
only reaches back to the days of the apostles, but one 
which reaches into the far future with consequences of 
good to the world that are beyond all human estimate. 
F«-r ihe purpose of promoting Christian union and pro- 
dueii g peace in the religious world, and in-order to 
carry oi.it this purpose more effectively, it was resolved, 
at a meeting held on the headwaters oi Buffalo Creek, 
August 17, 180D, that this little party of reformers 
would form themselves into a regular association, to be 
kie>wn as w, The Christian Association of Washington." 
They then appointed twenty-one of their number to 
meet and confer together, and, with the counsel of 
Thomas Campbell, to determine the proper method by 
which to consummate the object of the Association. 
Mr. Campbell prepared his Declaration and Address, 
the object of which was not to formulate a new creed, 
hut to set forth in a perspicuous and forcible manner 
the object of the movement in which he and those asso- 
ciated with him were enlisted. At a called and special 
meeting, he read the document in the presence of his 
brethren, that it might be approved and adopted by 

(148) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 149 

them. Having been unanimously adopted as an expo- 
nent of their pronounced principles, it was at once or- 
dered to be printed, which was done September 7, 1809. 
We quote as follows from this "Declaration ;" of the 
far-reaching consequences of the principles which the 
document contained, neither Thomas Campbell nor his 
associates had a full conception : 

"Our desire, therefore, for ourselves and our brethren 
would be, that, rejecting human opinions and the inven- 
tions of men, as of any authority, or as having any 
place in the Church of God, we might "forever cease 
from further contentions about such things, returning 
to and holding fast by the original standard, taking the 
Divine Word alone for our rule, the Holy Spirit for our 
teacher and guide to lead us into all truth, and Christ 
alone as exhibited in the Word for our salvation ; and 
that by so doing we may be at peace among ourselves, 
follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which 
no man shall see the Lord. Impressed with these sen- 
timents, we have resolved as follows:" 

I. That we form ourselves into a religious association, 
under the denomination of the Christian Association of 
Washington, for the sole purpose of promoting simple, 
evangelical Christianity, free from all mixture of human 
opinions and inventions of men. 

II. That each member, according to his ability, cheer- 
fully and liberally subscribe a specified sum, to be paid 
half-yearly, for the purpose of raising a fund to support 
a pure gospel ministry, that shall reduce to practice that 
whole form of doctrine, worship, discipline and govern- 
ment expressly revealed and enjoined in the Word of 
God; and also for supplying the poor with the Holy 
Scriptures. 

III. That this society consider it a duty, and shall 
use all proper means within its power, to encourage the 
formation of similar associations; and shall, for this 
purpose, hold itself in readiness, upon application, to 



150 THE WORD OF GOD THE SOLE RULE OF ACTION. 

correspond with and render all possible assistance to 
such as may desire to associate for the same desirable 
and important purposes. 

IV. That this society by no means considers itself a 
Church, nor does at all assume to itself the powers pe- 
culiar to such a society; nor do the members, as such, 
consider themselves as standing connected in that' rela- 
tion; nor as at all associated for the peculiar purposes 
of Church association, but merely as voluntary advo- 
cates for Church reformation, and as possessing the 
powers common to all individuals who may please to 
associate, in a peaceful and orderly manner, for any law- 
ful purpose — namely, the disposal of their time, counsel 
and property, as they may see cause. 

V. That this society, formed for the sole purpose of 
promoting simple, evangelical Christianity, shall to the 
utmost of its power, countenance and support such min- 
isters, and such only, as exhibit a manifest conformity 
to the original standard, in conversation and doctrine, in 
zeal and diligence; only such as reduce to practice that 
simple, original form of Christianity expressly exhibited 
upon the sacred page, without attempting to inculcate 
anything of human authority, of private opinion,, or 
inventions of men, as having place in the constitution, 
faith or worship of the Christian Church, or anything 
as matter of Christian faith or duty, for which there 
can not be expressly produced a "Thus saith the Lord!" 
either in express terms or by approved precedent. 

By the wording of the foregoing statement of prin- 
ciples, it will be seen that the Association did not at all 
regard itself as a Church, or publish these statements as 
the articles of a creed, but simply to publish to the world 
their desire to urge "a pure evangelical reformation, by 
the simple preaching of the gospel, and the administra- 
tion of its ordinances in exact conformity to the divine 
standard." Thomas Campbell wrote his Declaration and 
Address in the very midst of a paradise of religious 
partyism, and while sectarian rancor and hatred and 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 151 

jealously were consuming what little piety and spirit- 
uality were left in the country. '-Each party strove for 
supremacy, and maintained us peculiarities with a zeal 
as ardent and persecuting as the laws of the land and 
the usages of society would permit. The distinguishing 
tenets of each party were constantly thundered from 
every pulpit, and any departure from the 'traditions of 
the eiders,' was visited at once with the severest eccle- 
siastical censure. Covenanting, church politics, church 
psalmody, hyper-Calvinisfic questions, were the great 
topics of the day.; and such was the rigid, uncompro- 
mising spirit prevailing, that the most trivial things 
would produce a schism, so that old members were 
known to break off from their congregations simply 
because the clerk presumed to give out before singing 
two lines of a psalm instead of one, as had been the 
usual custom. Against this slavish subjection to custom, 
and to opinions and regulations that were merely of 
human origin, Mr. Campbell had long felt it his duty to 
protest; and knowing no remedy for the sad condition 
of things existing, except in a simple return to the plain 
teachings of the Bible, as alone authoritative and bind- 
ing upon the conscience, he and those associated with 
him felt it incumbent upon them to urge this upon re- 
ligious society. This they endeavored to do in the spirit 
of moderation and Christian love, hoping that the over- 
ture would be accepted by the religious communities 
around, especially by those of the Presbyterian order, 
whose differences were, in themselves, so trivial." {Mem- 
oirs of A. Campbell, Vol. I., p. 245.) 

This, in brief, was the religious complexion of things 
when Alexander Campbell appeared upon the stage of 
action, who in the providence of God was destined to 
become the chosen and distinguished promulgator of 



152 THE WORD OF GOD TIIE SOLE RULE OF ACTION. 

the reformatory principles enunciated by his illustrious 
lather. Up to the period when Alexander Campbell 
comes to the front, Thomas Campbell is still a Presby- 
terian in faith, but a free and independent thinker. 
While advocating Christian union upon the basis of the 
Bihle, he still continues to baptize infants. He still 
continues to be trammeled by the dogmas of Calvinism, 
and to struggle in the meshes of ecclesiasticism, but, 
having placed himself upon the solid ground of honest 
Bible exegesis, and having adopted an infallible rule of 
Scripture interpretation, we shall soon see how his prin- 
ciple drove him, and his Presbyterian son, Alexander, 
back upon apostolic ground, and how the God of truth 
guided their feet in a way they knew not. 



ATTEMPTS AT CHRISTIAN UNIOK 



While Alexander Campbell was reading the proof- 
sheets of the "Declaration," in 1809, soon after his 
arrival in Washington from Scotland, he observed to 
his father: "Then, sir, you must abandon and give up 
infant baptism, and some other practices for which it 
seems to me you can not produce an express precept or 
an example in any book of the Christian Scriptures." 
To which, after some hesitancy, the father responded: 
'"To the law and to the testimony,' we make our 
appeal. If not found therein, we, of course, must 
abandon it." Then, as showing the perplexed condi- 
tion of his mind, he added: "We could not unchurch 
ourselves now, and go out into the world, and then turn 
back again and enter the Church merely for the sake 
of form and decorum." When, in an accidental con- 
versation with Rev. Mr. Riddle, of the Presbyterian 
Church Union, the principles of the "Declaration and 
Address" were introduced as matters of discussion, and 
when Alexander referred to the proposition that "noth- 
ing should be required as a matter of faith or duty for 
which a 'Thus saith the Lord' could not be produced, 
either in express terms or by approved precedent," 
" Sir," said Mr. Riddle, "these words, however plausible 
in appearance, are not sound. For if you follow these 
out, you must become a Baptist." "Why, sir," said 
the young Alexander, " is there in the Scriptures no 

(153) 



154 .ATTEMPTS AT CHRISTIAN UNION. 

express precept nor precedent for infant baptism? 1 
The youthful enquirer was startled and chagrined that 
he could not produce one; and forthwith he appeals to 
Andrew Munro, the principal bookseller in Canonsburg, 
to furnish him all the treatises at his command in favor 
of infant baptism. lie inquired for no works 0:1 the 
other side of the question, for at this time ho had little 
or no acquaintance with the Baptists, and regarded 
them as a people comparatively ignorant and uneduca- 
ted, lie was thrown into a state of doubt and perplex- 
ity by pondering this law of scriptural exegesis as 
previously announced by his father: " We make our 
appeal to the law and to the testimony. Whatever is 
uot found therein, we, of course, must abandon." lie 
read the pedobaptist authorities in ardent hopes of for- 
tifying his mind in favor of infant baptism. The more 
he investigated, the more his prejudices and predilections 
gave way, and the conviction gradually grew upon him 
that infant baptism was a human device. Thoroughly 
disgusted with the bald assumptions and fallacious rea- 
sonings of the pedobaptist authorities, he threw them 
all aside, and fled hopefully to the Greek New Testa- 
ment in the fond expectation of finding convincing 
proof of the validity of infant baptism in the fountain 
head. But the plainness of the Greek text only served 
to strengthen his doubts. And when again he entered 
into a conversation with his father on this vexed ques- 
tion, he found him entirely willing to admit that there 
were neither "express terms" nor "precedent" to 
authorize the practice. "But," said he, "as for those 
who are already members of the Church and partici- 
pants of the Lord's Supper, I can see no propriety, 
even if the scriptural evidence for infant baptism be 
found deficient, in their unchurching or paganizing 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 155 

themselves, or in putting off Christ, merely for the 
sake of making a new profession; and thus going out 
of the Church merely for the sake of coming in again." 

By these continued discussions it will he perceived that 
a serious conflict was going on in the minds of these two 
men, and especially in the mind of the son, as to the 
question whether it were heater, all things considered 
to adhere to Presbyterian usages and to the ''traditions 
of the fathers," or, enlightened by the Word of God, 
carry out the logic of their own rules of Bible interpre- 
tation. Being thoroughly honest men, and seeking 
only to know the truth, and, above all, desiring to 
effect Christian union exclusively upon the basis of the 
Bible, they determined to take the Word of God as 
their sole and infallible guide. The "Declaration and 
Address" contains the following sentiments, as illustra- 
tive of the religious condition of things then existing: 

What dreary effects of those accursed divisions are to 
be seen, even in this highly favored country, where the 
sword of the civil magistrate has not yet learned to 
serve at the altar! Have we not seen congregations 
broken to pieces, neighborhoods of professing Chris- 
tians first thrown into confusion by party contentions, 
and, in the end, entirely deprived of gospel ordinances; 
while, in the meanwhile, large settlements and tracts of 
country remain to this day destitute of a gospel minis- 
try, many of them in little better than a state of 
heathenism, the churches being either so weakened by 
divisions that they can not send them ministers, or the 
people so divided among themselves that they will not 
receive them? Several, at the same time, who live at 
the door of a preached gospel, dare not in conscience 
go to hear it, and, of course, enjoy little more advan- 
tage in that respect than living in the midst of 
heathens. 

Not discouraged by the small progress made toward 



156 ATTEJVfPTS AT CHRISTIAN UNION. 

Christian union, and not dismayed by the powerful op- 
position he encountered from Lis former Presbyterian 
brethren, he thus, from time to time, addresses his little 
band : 

"Dearly beloved brethren, why should we deem it a 
thing incredible that the Church of Christ, in this highly 
favored country, should resume that original unity, peace 
and purity, which belong to its constitution and consti- 
tute its glory? Or is there anything that can be justly 
deemed necessary for this desirable purpose but to con- 
form to the model and adopt the practice of the primi- 
tive Church, expressly exhibited in the New Testament? 
Whatever alterations this might produce in any or in 
all of the churches, should, we think, neither be deemed 
inadmissible nor ineligible. Surely such alteration would 
be every way for the better and not for the worse, un- 
less we should suppose the divinely-inspired rule to be 
faulty or defective. Were we, then, in our church con- 
stitution and managements to exhibit a complete con- 
formity to the apostolic Church, would we not be in that 
respect as perfect as Christ intended us to be? And 
should not this suffice us?" 



FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. 



Just before submitting his thirteen propositions t< 
bis brethren and to the religious world, with a view < 
drawing the people away from strife and content 10 
and in order to lix their minds upon the liberty ot ti 
gospel with which Christ make,s all willing men fri e, 
says: " Let us not imagine that the subjoined pro} 
tions are at all intended as an overture toward a 
creed or standard for the Church, or as in any way 
signed to be made a term of communion; nothing 
be further from our intention. They are merely des 
ed to open up the way, that we may come fairly i 
firmly to original ground upon clear and certain pi 
ises, and take up things just as the apostles left the n 
and thus, disentangled from the accruing embarrass- 
ments of intervening ages, we may stand with evideme 
upon the same ground on which the Church stood at 
the beginning." 

Here indeed was the beginning of radical work. Here 
was a proposition to pass back over all human author- 
ities, over all the traditions and false dogmas of "inter- 
vening ages," and begin a thorough restoration of t!ie 
ancient order of things. Neither Luther nor any one else 
since his day ever attempted such a revolution. Thomas 
Campbell proposed to set aside the decrees of Popes, 
Councils, Synods, Conferences and General Assemblies, 
and to ignore all the traditions and corrupt practices of 

(157) 



158 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. 

an apostate Church, and to build upon Christ alone, 
ilere was an invitation to come directly to the primitive 
model — to return to pristine purity and perfection — and, 
consentaneous with, that act, the rejection of all human 
innovations, andthe repudiation of all human authority 
It seems as though God guided and guarded the hand 
that penned such grand and startling propositions. 

What a mighty revolution have these propositions 
wrought within the last half century. The thoughts 
contained in these propositions have changed and mod- 
iiicd the theology of the entire religious world, have in- 
fluenced every pulpit, have changed the tone of every 
religious journal, and still continue to challenge inves- 
tigation. As the propositions referred to are not access- 
ible to many of our readers, we think we are rendering 
valuable service by reproducing several, if not all of 
them in this connection. 

Proposition 1. That the Church of Christ upon earth 
is essentially, intentionally and constitutionally one; 
consisting of all those in every place that profess their 
faith in Christ and obedience to him in all things accord- 
ing to the Scriptures, and that manifest the same by 
their tempers and conduct; and none else, as none else 
can be truly and properly called Christians. 

2. That, although the Church of Christ upon earth 
must necessarily exist in particular and distinct societies, 
locally separate one from the other, yet there ought to 
be no schisms, no uncharitable divisions among them. 
They ought to receive each other, as Jesus Christ hath 
also received them, to the glory of God. And, for this 
purpose, they onght all to walk by the same rule; to mind 
and speak the same things, and to be perfectly joined to- 
gether in the same mind and in the same judgment. 

3. That, in order 10 this, nothing ought to be incul- 
cated upon Christians as articles of faith, nor required 
of them as terms of communion, but what is expressly 
taught and enjoined upon them in the Word of God. Nor 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 159 

ought anything to be admitted as of divine obligation 
in their Church constitution and managements, but what 
is expressly enjoined by the authority of oar Lord Jesus 
Christ and his apostles upon the New Testament Church, 
either in express terms or by approved precedent. 

4. That, although the Old and New Testaments are 
inseparably connected, making together but one perfect 
and entire revelation of the divine will for the edirica- 
tion and salvation of the Church, and, therefore, in that 
respect can not be separated; yet, as to what directly 
and properly belongs to their immediate object, the New 
Testament is as perfect a constitution for the worship, dis- 
cipline and government of the New Testament Church, and 
as 'perfect a rule for the particular duties of its members, 
as the Old Testament was for the worship, discipline and 
government of the Old Testament Church and the par- 
ticular duties of its members. 

5. That with respect to commands and ordinances of 
our Lord Jesus Christ, where the Scriptures are silent 
as to the express time or maimer of performance, if any 
such there be, no human authority has power to interfere 
in order to supply the supposed deficiency by making laws 
for the Church, nor can anything be more required of 
Christians in such cases but only that they so observe 
these commands and ordinances as will evidently answer 
the declared and obvious ends of their institution. Much 
less has any human authority power to impose new com- 
mands or ordinances upon the Church, which our Lord 
Jesus Christ has not enjoined. Nothing ought to he re- 
ceived into the faith or worship of the Church, or be 
made a term of communion among Christians, that is 
not as old as the New Testament. 

6. That although inferences and deductions from 
Scripture premises, when fairly inferred, may be truly 
called the doctrine of God's holy word, yet are they not 
formally binding upon the consciences of Christians fur- 
ther than they perceive the connection, and evidently 
see they are so, for their faith must not stand in the 
wisdom of men, but in the power and veracity of God. 
Therefore no such deductions can be made terms of 



160 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. 

communion, but do properly belong to the after and 
progressive edification of the Church. Hence, it is evi- 
dent that no such deductions or inferential truths ought to 
have any place in the Church's Confession. 

Proposition 12 reads as follows : 

That all that is necessary to the highest state of per- 
fection and purity of the Church upon earth is, first, 
that none be received as members but such as, having 
that due measure of scriptural self-knowledge described 
above, do profess their faith in Christ and obedience to 
him in all things according to the Scriptures; nor, sec- 
ondly^ that any be retained in her communion longer than 
they continue to manifest the reality of their profession 
by temper and conduct. Thirdly, that her ministers, 
duly and scripturally qualified, inculcate none other 
things than those very articles of faith and holiness 
expressly revealed and enjoined in the Word of God. 
Lastly, that in all their administrations they keep close 
by the observance of all divine ordinances, after the ex- 
ample of the primitive Church, exhibited in the New Test- 
ament, without any additions whatsoever of human opin- 
ions or inventions of men. 

We have itcdicized certain phrases in these proposi- 
tions, in order to enlist the special attention of our read- 
ers. The sentiments contained in these propositions 
are the sentiments strenuously advocated by the friends 
of the Review, and the same that we have persistently 
urged in the past. These sublime statements constitute 
no creed, but they simply indicate the fixed purpose of 
the author, which is also our fixed purpose, viz: the 
complete restoration of the primitive order of things, 
in commands, precepts, ordinances, worship and dis- 
cipline. 



THE RESTORATION". 



In defending his thirteen propositions against the 
heated assaults of his Presbyterian ministerial breth- 
ren, who tried in every possible way to inveigle him in 
self-contradictions and inconsistencies, Thomas Camp- 
bell sought to draw a distinction between faith and 
opinion, between an express scriptural declaration and 
inferences which may be deduced from it. By the lat- 
ter were meant such conclusions as were not necessarily 
involved in the Scripture premises, and which were to 
be regarded as private opinions, and not to be made a 
rule of faith or duty to any one. In order to obtain the 
true meaning of Scripture, "the whole revelation was 
to be taken together, or in its due connection upon 
every article, and not on any detached sentence." If, 
in consequence of thus allowing full freedom of opin- 
ion, any should bring forward the charge of latitudi- 
narianism, they are requested to consider whether this 
charge does not lie against those who add their opinions 
to the Word of God, rather than against those who in- 
sist upon returning to the profession and practice of the 
primitive Church. A return to the Bible, he insisted, 
was the only way to get rid of existing sectarian evils. 
He goes on to say that "a manifest attachment to our 
Lord Jesus Christ in faith, holiness and charity, was the 
original criterion of Christian character; the distin- 
guishing badge of our holy profession; the foundation 
14 (161) 



162 THE RESTORATION. 

and cement of Christian unity. But now, alas! and 
long since, an external name, a mere educational form- 
ality of sameness in the profession of a certain standard 
or formula of human fabric, with a very moderate de- 
gree of what is called morality, forms the bond and 
foundation, the root and reason of ecclesiastical unity. 
Thomas Campbell speaks like an oracle, as he continues 
his arraignment of the hypocritical clergy of his day, 
of whom we find a counterpart in the present day. 
What was then true of the clerical profession is still 
true. "Can an Ethiopian change his skin, or a leopard his 
spots?" Referring to those who love the creed above 
the Bible, and who prefer leadership in sectarian divi- 
sion to the unity of hearts in Christ, he says: 

Take from such the technicalities of their profession, 
the shibboleth of party, and what have they more? 
What have they left to distinguish and hold them to- 
gether? As to the Bible, they are little beholden to it; 
they have learned little from it, they know little about 
it, and therefore depend as little upon it. Nay, they 
will even tell you it would be of Tittle use to them with- 
out their formula; they could not know a Papist from 
a Protestant by it; that merely by it they could neither 
keep the Church nor themselves right for a single week. 
You might preach to them what you please, they could 
not distinguish truth from error. Poor people! it is no 
wonder they are so fond of their formula. Therefore 
they that exercise authority upon them, and tell them 
what they are to believe and what they are to do, are 
called benefactors. These are the reverend and right 
reverend authors, upon whom they can and do place a 
more implicit confidence than upon the holy apostles 
and prophets. These plain, honest, unassuming men, 
who would never venture to say or do anything in the 
name of the Lord without an express revelation from 
heaven, and, therefore, were never distinguished by the 
venerable title of "Rabbi'' or "Reverend," but just 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 163 

simply Paul, John, Thomas, etc. — these were but ser- 
vants. They did not assume to legislate, and, therefore, 
neither assumed nor received any honorary titles among 
men, but merely such as were descriptive of their office. 
And how, we beseech you, shall this gross and prevalent 
corruption be purged out of the visible professing 
Church but by a radical reform, but by a returning to 
the original simplicity, the primitive purity of the 
Christian institution, and, of course, taking up things 
just as we hnd them upon the sacred page? And who 
is there that knows anything of the present state of the 
Church, who does not perceive that it is generally over- 
run with the aforesaid evils? Or who, that reads his 
Bible, and receives the impressions it must necessarily 
produce upon the receptive mind by the statements it 
exhihits, does not perceive that such a state of things is 
as distinct from genuine Christianity as oil is from 
water? 

In opposition to the claim made that a creed secures 
uniformity of belief and purity of doctrine, history 
attests that Arians, Socinians, Arminians, Calvinists 
and Antinomians, have existed under the Westminster 
Confession, and under the Athauasian Creed or the 
Articles of the Church of England. 

" Will any one say," it is asked, "that a person might 
not with equal ease, honesty and consistency, be an 
Arian or a Socinian in his heart while subscribing to 
the Westminster Confession or the Athauasian Creed, 
as while making his unqualified profession to believe 
everything that the Scriptures declare concerning Christ? 
— to put all that confidence in him, and to ascribe all 
that glory, honor and thanksgiving and praise to him 
professed and ascribed to him in the divine word? If 
you say not, it follows, of undeniable consequence, that 
the wisdom of men, in those compilations, has effected 
what the divine wisdom either could not, would not, or 
did not do in that all perfect and g-lorioiis revelation of 
his will contained in the Holv Scriptures. Happy 
emendation! Blessed expedient! Happy, indeed, for 



164 THE RESTORATION. 

the Church that Athanasius arose in the fourth century 
to perfect what the apostles had leit in such a crude and 
unfinished statel But if, after all, the divine wisdom 
did not think proper to do anything more, or anything 
else, than is already done in the sacred oracles, to settle 
and determine those important points, who can say that 
he determined such a thins: as should be done after- 
ward? Or has he anywhere given us any intimation of 
such an intention ?" 

In regard to the charge of an intention to make a 
new party, Thomas Campbell said, in further defense 
of his Thirteen Propositions: "If the divine word be 
not the standard of a party, then are we not a party, 
for we have adopted no other. If to maintain its alone- 
sufficiency be not a party principle, then we are not a 
party. If to justify this principle by our practice in 
making a rule of it, and of it alone, and not of our own 
opinions, nor those of others, be not a party principle, 
then we are not a party. If to propose and practice 
neither more nor less than it expressly reveals and 
enjoins be not a partial business, then we are not a 
party. These are the very sentiments we have ap- 
proved and recommended, as a society formed for the 
express purpose of promoting Christian unity in oppo- 
sition to a party spirit." 

We have thus quoted copiously from the writings of 
Thomas Campbell, while he was yet a Presbyterian in 
name, if not in faith, to give our readers a clear concep- 
tion of the origin of the so-called "Reformation" of the 
nineteenth century, and to show also that the plea we 
are now making in favor of a complete restoration of 
primitive Christianity is based upon the principles con- 
tained in that remarkable document styled the "Decla- 
ration and Address." Says Dr. Richardson, in his 
'Memoirs of A. Campbell: "So fully and so kindly was 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 165 

every possible objection considered and refuted, that no 
attempt was ever made by the opposers of the proposed 
movement to controvert directly a single position which it 
contained." Says the same biographer: "To all the 
propositions and reasonings of this Address, Alexander 
Campbell gave at once his hearty approbation, as they 
expressed most clearly the convictions to which he had 
himself been brought by his experience and observation 
in Scotland, and his reflections upon the state of relig- 
ious society at large. Captivated by its clear and 
decisive presentations of duty, and the noble Christian 
enterprise to which it invited, he at once, though un- 
provided with worldly property, and aware that the 
proposed reformation would, in all probability, provoke 
the hostility of the religious parties, resolved to conse- 
crate his life to the advocacy of the principles which it 
presented. Accordingly, when, soon afterward, his 
father took occasion to inquire as to his arrangements 
for the future, he at once informed him that he had 
determined to devote himself to the dissemination and 
support of the principles and views presented in the 
"Declaration and Address." 

Thomas Campbell, having been solicited both by pri- 
vate members and by some of the ministers of the Presby- 
terian Church, to form an ecclesiastical union with them; 
and having been assured by certain Presbyterian minis- 
ters that the Presbytery generally would willingly re- 
ceive him and the members of the Christian Association 
upon the principles they advocated, made overtures 
looking to that end, in the fond hope that by operating 
through the Presbyterian Church and its various agencies 
he might be enabled to advance more effectively the 
cause of Christian union. Alexander had little confi- 
dence that his father would succeed in propitiating the 



166 THE RESTORATION. 

excited spirit of the Presbyterians, who stood more upon 
their ecclesiastical dignity than upon their love of Chris- 
tian union. The "Synod of Pittsburg" assembled at 
Washington, Pa., on the second day of October, 1810. 
This august body refused to receive the reformer into 
their body. The grounds of their objection, it appears, 
were the fears they entertained in regard to the influ- 
ence of the Christian Association, which, as before 
stated, was organized with the sole view of promoting 
Christian union. And it is a noteworthy fact that the 
Presbyterians have not, since that day, cultivated the 
least disposition for Christian union, upon the basis of 
the Bible or upon any other basis. In his address before 
the Synod, Mr. Campbell was careful to define clearly 
the position which the society occupied, and to state 
that it was in no sense a Church, but simply a society 
organized for the promotion of Christian unity. He 
earnestly and affectionately proposed to the Synod to 
be obedient to it in all things that the gospel and the 
law of Christ inculcated, only desiring to be permitted 
to advocate that sacred unity which Christ and his apos- 
tles expressly enjoined; or, in other words, that the 
Synod would consent to "Christian union upon Chris- 
tian principles." The Synod rejected his overtures be- 
cause he would not unite with them on Presbyterian 
principles. 



THE BIBLE THE ONLY CREED, 



When Thomas Campbell, from a sense of duty, made 
his second appeal to the same Synod, which had in the 
first instance replied to him in very ambiguous terms, 
and asked for an explanation of the clause "many other 
important reasons,'' by which the Synod attempted to 
justify its action, this grave body of ecclesiastics finds 
one of them in the childish and frivolous pretext that 
Alexander had been allowed to exercise his gift of pub- 
lic speaking, as it alleges, "without any regular author- 
ity," or before ordination — a liberty taken both by Knox 
and Calvin, and one frequently granted to theological 
students. The unrighteousness of the rejection of the 
application of Thomas Campbell is made manifest by 
the fact that the Confession of Faith, under wliich the 
Synod acted, declares the Bible to be the only rule of 
faitb and practice; and yet when a respectable body of 
Christian people ask for admission, they are ruled out 
^-cashiered — because they will come under no other rule 
than the Bible! For adhering to the "only rule," ad- 
mitted to be inspired and infallible, and for presuming 
to doubt the infallibility of the Westminster Confession 
— the production of uninspired men — they are rejected: 
rejected, not for any violation of the "only rule," but 
because they can not admit that a human creed or con- 
fession is in reality the "only rule." Says Dr. Richard- 
son, in his Memoirs of A. Campbell: "How completely 

(167) 



168 THE BIBLE THE ONLY CREED. 

this verified the remark made by Mr. Campbell in his 
Declaration and Address, 'That a book adopted by any 
party as its standard for all matters of doctrine, worship, 
discipline and government, must be considered as the 
Bible of that party!' And how evident it is that, in 
the sectarian world, there are just as many different 
Bibles as there are different and authoritative explana- 
tions of the Bible, called creeds and confessions! In the 
case of Thomas Campbell, it was the ' Confessiou,' and 
not the Bible, that was made the standard by which one 
of the best men was denied religious fellowship." Is it 
possible for sectarian bigotry to go beyond this? 

Alexander Campbell, at the age of twenty-two, now 
comes forward, enters the arena of public conflict, re- 
views the action of this Synod, and not only justifies 
the course pursued by his father, but takes more ad- 
vanced ground than that occupied by his father. The 
Christian Association of Washington held its semi-an- 
nual meeting at Washington on Thursday, the first of 
November, 1810. Alexander, the young polemic, was 
not made of such stuff as to tamely submit to the pro- 
ceedings of the Synod in relation to his father and the 
Christian Association, and he therefore resolved to avail 
himself of the first opportunity to examine them pub- 
licly. We have not space for the reproduction of this 
masterly review. As to the views entertained at this 
time by Alexander Campbell and his father, it appears 
from the contents of the address delivered on the occa- 
sion referred to, (1) that they regarded the religious 
parties around them as possessing the substance of Chris- 
tianity, but as having failed to preserve "the form of 
sound words," in which it was proclaimed in apostolic 
days; and that the chief object in the proposed reform- 
ation was an effort to induce all good people to abandon 



REEORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 169 

every human system, and persuade them to the adoption 
of "this form of sound words," as the infallible basis of 
Christian union. (2) That they regarded each congre- 
gation as an independent organization, enjoying its own 
individuality, and maintaining its own internal govern- 
ment by elders and deacons, and yet not so absolutely 
independent of other congregations as not to be bound 
to them by fraternal and spiritual relations. (3) That 
they considered "lay preaching' 1 as authorized, and de- 
nied the distinction between clergy and laity to be scrip- 
tural. (4) That they looked upon infant baptism as 
without direct scriptural authority, but that they were 
willing to let it rest as a matter of forbearance, and al- 
low the continuance of the practice in the case of those 
who conscientiously approved it, as Paul and James 
permitted circumcision for a time in deference to Jewish 
prejudices. (5) That they clearly anticipated the prob- 
ability of being compelled, on account of the refusal of 
the religious parties to accept their overture, to resolve 
the Christian Association into a distinct Church, in or- 
der to carry out for themselves the duties and obliga- 
tions enjoined on them in the Scriptures. (6) That in 
receiving nothing but what was expressly revealed, they 
foresaw and admitted that many things deemed precious 
and important b}^ the existing religious societies, must 
inevitably be excluded. 

Where, among all the existing sects, do you find such 
sentiments uttered as were uttered by Thomas Camp- 
bell? Is there one prominent man among any of the 
denominations, at this time, who proposes such meas- 
ures of reform as were instituted by Thomas Campbell? 
Do you hear any of our Protestant divines talk as he 
talked, and do you see any of them labor as he labored, 
to crush out sectarianism and to purify the Church of all 
15 



170 THE BIBLE THE U.NLY CREED. 

tradition? Do you iind one Protestant minister among 
ten thousand ministers making the least pica for Chris- 
tian union upon the basis of the L>ible? Not one. In- 
tellectually and morally, in comparison with Thomas 
Camp be I L, they are aii pignnes, 



ALEXANDER CAMPBELL ABANDONS SECTA- 
RIANISM. 



Up to March, 1812, wnen the first child of Alexander 
Campbell was born, the question of infant baptism had 
not given him much concern; it had not become to him 
a question of practical interest. Up to this period, the 
unity of the Church, and the overthrow of sectarianism, 
and the restoration of the Bible to its original position, 
had chiefly engaged his attention. In comparison with 
these objects, the question of baptism was one of small 
importance, and, hence, neither himself nor his father 
entertained any decided convictions upon this subject. 
About a year before the time we are speaking of, in a 
sermon founded on Mark xvi. 15, 16, he said: "As I am 
sure it is unsriptural to make this matter a term of com- 
munion, I let it slip. I wish to think and let others think 
on these matters." But the unqualified adoption of the 
principle, "Where the Bible speaks, we speak; where the 
Bible is silent, we are silent," began to press upon him, 
and upon those wbo attended the Brush Run Church, 
where the question of baptism was beginning to be dis- 
cussed as one of considerable importance. The reading 
and investigation of the great commission which Christ 
gave to his apostles, began to give him serious concern- 
Admitting that infant baptism was without divine war. 
rant, the question began to assume quite a different as- 

(171) 



172 ALEXANDER CAMPBELL ABANDONS SECTARIANISM. 

pect, and was now no longer, "May we safely reject 
infant baptism as a human invention?" but, "May we 
omit believers' baptism, which all admit to be divinely 
commanded?" He began to be troubled with the ques- 
tion, "h' the baptism of infants be without divine war- 
rant, it is invalid, and they who receive it are, in point 
of fact, still unbaptized. When they come to know this 
in after years, will God accept the credulity of the par- 
ent for the faith of the child? Men may he pleased to 
omit faith on the part of the person baptized, but will 
G<xl sanction the omission of baptism on the part of the 
believer, on the ground that in his infancy he had been 
the subject of a ceremony which had not been enjoined? 
On the other hand, if the practice of infant baptism can 
be justified by inferential reasoning or any sufficient evi- 
dence, why should it not be adopted or continued by 
common consent, without further discussion?" 

Such were some of the reasonings which, at this time, 
pressed heavily upon the clear mind and honest heart 
of the youthful Alexander Campbell. Having finally 
abandoned all uninspired authorities, he began a critical 
examination of the words rendered baptism and baptize 
in the original Greek, and, as a result of his research, 
he became thoroughly satisfied that they could mean 
only immersion and immerse. Further investigation led 
him to the clear and indisputable conviction that believ- 
ers, and believers only, are proper scriptural subjects of 
baptism. The searching investigations he instituted, 
led him to perceive that the rite of sprinkling, to which 
he had been subjected i 1 infancy, was wholly unauthor- 
ized, and that consequently he was, in point of fact, an 
unbaptized person, and hence could not, consistently, 
preach a baptism to others of which he himself had 
never been a subject. Concerning the immersion of A. 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 173 

Campbell and others, we quote the following interesting 

narrative from the Memoirs of A. Campbell: 

As he was not one who could remain long without 
carrying out his convictions of duty, he resolved at once 
to obey what he now, in the light of the Scriptures, 
found to be a postive divine command. Having formed 
some acquaintance with a Matthias Luce, a Baptist 
preacher, who lived ahove Washington, he concluded 
to make application to him to perform the rite, and, on. 
his way to visit him, called to see his father and the 
family, who were then liv ; ng on a little farm between 
Washington and Mt. Pleasant. Soon alter arriving, 
his sister Dorothea took him aside, and told him that 
she had been in great trouble ior some time about her 
baptism. She could find, she said, no authority what- 
ever for infant baptism, and could not resist the convic- 
tion that she never had been scripturally baptized. She 
wished him, therefore, to represent the ease on her 
behalf, to her lather. At this unexpected announce- 
ment, Alexander smiled, and told her that he was now 
on his way to request the services of Mr. Luce, as he 
had himself determined to be immersed, and would lay 
the whole case before their father. He took the first 
opportunity, accordingly, of presenting the matter, 
stating the course he had pursued and the conclusions 
he had reached. His father, somewhat to his surprise, 
had but little to say, and offered no particular objection. 
He spoke of the position they had heretofore occupied 
in regard to this question, but forbore to urge it in op- 
position to Alexander's conscientious convictions. He 
finally remarked, "I have no more to add. You must 
please yourself." It was suggested, however, that in 
view of the public position they occupied as religious 
teachers and advocates of reformation, it would be 
proper that the matter should be publicly announced 
and attended to amongst the people to whom they had 
been accustomed to preach; and he requested Alexan- 
der to get Mr. Luce to call with him on his way down, 
at whatever time misfit be appointed. 

Wednesday, the 12th day of June, 1812, having been 



174 ALEXANDER CAMPBELL ABANDONS SECTARIANISM. 

selected, Elder Luce, in company with Elder Henry 
Spears, called at Thomas Campbell's on their way to 
the place chosen for the immersion, which was the deep 
pool in Buffalo Creek, where three members of the As- 
sociation had formerly been baptized. Next morning, 
as they were setting out, Thomas Campbell simply re- 
marked that Mrs. Campbell had put up a change of 
raiment for herself and him, which was the lirst intima- 
tion given that they intended also to be immersed. 
Upon arriving at the place, as the greater part of the 
members of the Brush Run Church, with a large 
concourse of others, attracted by the novelty of the 
occasion, were assembled at David Bryant's house, near 
the place, Thomas Campbell thought it proper to pre- 
sent, in full, the reasons which had determined his 
course. In a. very long address lie accordingly re- 
viewed the entire ground which he had occupied, and 
the struggles that he had undergone in reference to the 
particular subject of baptism, which he had earnestly 
desired to dispose of, in such a manner, that it might be 
no hindrance in the attainment of Christian unity which 
he had labored to establish upon the Bible alone. In 
endeavoring to do this, he admitted that he had been 
led to overlook its importance, and the very many plain 
and obvious teachings of the Scriptures on the subject; 
but having at length attained a clearer view of duty, he 
felt it incumbent upon him to submit to what he now 
plainly saw was an important Divine institution. Alex- 
ander afterward followed in an extended defense of their 
proceedings, urging the necessity of submitting implic- 
itly to all God's commands, and showing that the 
baptism of believers only was authorized by the Word 
of God. 

Seven persons were immersed — Alexander Campbell 
and his wife; his father and mother, and his sister; with 
James Ilanen and his wife, the latter beiug a very intel- 
ligent and courageous woman. Alexander had stipula- 
ted with Elder Luce that the ceremony should be 
performed precisely according to the apostolic pattern, 



UEFottMATORY MOVEMENTS. 175 

and that, as there was no account given to show that 
converts in primitive times were called upon to give 
what is termed a "Christian experience," before they 
had entered upon a Christian life, this modern custom 
should be omitted, and that the candidates should be 
admitted on the simple confession that "Jesus Christ is 
the Son of the living God." Elder Luce at first ob- 
jected, as being contrary to Baptist usage, but finally 
yielded, believing that the demand was right, and that 
he would run the risk of censure. All were, therefore, 
admitted to immersion upon making the simple but 
comprehensive confession of Christ, the same as that 
which was required in apostolic times. This meeting, 
it is related, continued about seven hours. From what 
has been related in the foregoing chapters, one can 
rej.dily perceive that the results of honest investigation 
thus practically brought to an issue, had been reached 
only through a series of severe mental struggles. 
Thomas Campbell had been a pedobaptist minister for 
twenty-fivQ years. It never entered his mind, when he 
first began to advocate Christian union among Presby- 
terians, that Ids principles would actually lead to the 
abandonment of infant baptism. Having accomplished 
his special mission in propounding and developing the 
true basis of Christian union, which, in a general way, 
w T as enunciated in his "Declaration and Address," and 
beyond which general principle of union he did not 
seem disposed to advance, his illustrious son Alexander 
now changed positions with him, and advanced to the 
front as the master-spirit of the new revolution, deeply 
impressed with the conviction that the hand of God 
was guiding him in a path of duty and responsibility 
not contemplated by his father. 

The Brush Run congregation continued to grow, by 



176 ALEXANDER CAMPBELL ABANDONS SECTARIANISM. 

frequent accessions of immersed believers; and as it had 
been with the church organized by the llaldanes at 
Edinburgh, so to this church, immersion became an apt 
emblem of separation from the world — a separation 
from the traditions of an apostate Church, a separation 
from mystic Babylon. They adopted immersion as the 
only scriptural mode; they rejected infant baptism as a 
human invention, and the simple confession that " Jesus 
is the Christ, the Son of God," made to Christ b^y the 
first converts, was acknowledged as the only require- 
ment which could be scripturally demanded of those 
who desired to become members of the one body. All 
these matters were determined by the plain and une- 
quivocal authority of the Holy Scriptures, as, from that 
time to this, they have continued to be prominent feat- 
ures in our plea for a restoration of the apostolic order 
of things. They had now, indeed, become learners in 
the school of Christ; and in this respect they diflered 
widely from all preceding reformers, in the fact that, 
instead of making creeds, re-forming creeds, and re-ad- 
justing creeds, to suit the changing times, and to please 
the changeable moods of men, they sought after and 
adopted the Bible as their only creed, and found the 
basis of Christian unity alone in the word of God. 
They proposed no patchwork of the divine order of 
things, but, finally, so far as Alexander Campbell is 
concerned, a radical reformation was determined upon. 
Abandoning all creeds, as the outgrowth of human 
weakness, and as the groundwork of selfish sectarian 
rivals, he proposed a reformation de novo — a reforma- 
tion that would eventually result in a complete restora- 
tion. And, hence, he instituted at once a thorough 
research of the entire grounds of Christianity; and, by 
his voluminous writings, and public debases, and by his 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 177 

matchless sermons, repeated and published, he rescued 
the .Bible from the hands of priests and hireling clergy, 
and, in defiance of the combined assaults of the infidel 
world, placed Christianity upon the basis of authentic- 
ity, credibility and inspiration. lie found the plan of 
salvation in the Scriptures, and not in a set of cold, 
abstract propositions; he found a Savior in the persop 
of Jesus the Christ, and not within the pale of some 
sectarian church; he discovered that the Church of 
Christ was established in Jerusalem, and not in Rome, 
or at Augsburg, or at Heidelberg, or at Oxford, or at 
Westminster. 



A. CAMPBELL UNITES WITH THE BAPTISTS. 



In 1813, as in 1883, baptism, as taught by Baptists, 
was not a command of Jesus Christ, made essential to 
the salvation of a sinner, as one of the conditions of 
pardon and acceptance, but it was simply made a door 
into the "visible "Church" — a door into the Baptist 
Church. The regenerated sinner — enlightened, saved 
and sanctified by the direct, irresistible energy of the 
H«>ly Spirit, without faith in testimony and without obe- 
dience to the gospel — tirst became a member of the "in- 
visible Church" (whatever that is), and afterward, by a 
vote of a local Baptist Church, he was allowed to be 
baptized in order that he might have the inestimable 
privilege of communing with Baptists in a visible Bap- 
tist Church! On the contrary, A. Campbell and those 
who worshiped with him in the Brush Run congrega- 
tion, made the discovery, by honest and candid investi- 
gation, that no one, under apostolic teaching, was ever 
received into the one body — into a state of salvation and 
justification — without immersion into the name of the 
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. They 
discovered that it w^as by "the obedience of the faith," 
as well as by faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, 
that the sinner came into covenant relation with God, 
and that by this transition act he w T as conveyed from 
"the power of darkness into the kingdom of God's dear 
Son." In the Harbinger for 1848, page 344, A. Camp- 

(178) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 179 

bell tells how he came to unite with the Baptists, and 
the circumstances which led to a conditional union with 
the Redstone Baptist Association. And here is the nar- 
rative : 

"After my baptism, and the consequent new constitu- 
tion of our church of Brush Run, it became my duty to 
set forth the causes of this change in our position to the 
professing world, and also to justify them by an appeal 
to the Oracles of God. But this was not all; the posi- 
tion of baptism itself to the other institutions of Christ 
became a new subject of examination, and a very ab- 
sorbing one. A change of one's views on any radical 
matter, in all its practical bearings and effects upon all 
his views, not only in reference to that simple result, 
but also in reference to all its connections with the whole 
system of which it is a part, is not to be computed, a 
priori, by himself (U 1 by any one else. The whole Chris- 
tian doctrine is exhibited in three symbols — baptism, the 
Lord's Supper, and the Lord's Day institution. Some, 
nay, very many, change their views in regard to some 
one of these, without ever allowing themselves to trace 
its connections with the whole institution of which it is 
either a part or a symbol. My mind, neither by nature 
nor by education, was one of that order. I must know 
now two things about everything— its cause and its rela- 
tions. Hence my mind was, for a time, set loose from 
all its former moorings. It was not a simple change of 
views on baptism, which happens a thousand times with- 
out anything more, but a new commencement, I was 
placed on a new eminence — a new peak of the mountain 
of (iod, from which the whole landscape of Christianity 
presented itself to my mind in a new attitude and posi- 
tion. 

" L had no idea of uniting with the Baptists, more 



180 A. CAMPBELL UNITES WITH THE BAPTISTS. 

than with the Moravians or the mere Independents. I 
had unfortunately formed a very unfavorable opinion of 
the Baptist preachers as then introduced to my ac- 
quaintance, as narrow, contracted, illiberal and unedu- 
cated nun. This, indeed, I am sorry to say, is still my 
opinion of the ministry of that Association at that day; 
an I whether they are yet much improved I am without 
satisfactory evidence. 

•'The people, however, called Baptists, were much 
more highly appreciated by mo than their ministry. 
In lee I, the ministry of some sects is generally in the 
aggregate the worse portion of them. It was certainly 
so in tile Redstone Association, thirty years ago. They 
wjre little men in a big office. The office did not tit 
them. Tney had a wrong idea, too, of what was want- 
ing. They seemed to think that a change of apparel — ■ 
a black coat instead of a drab — a broad rim o'n their hat 
instead of a narrow one — a prolongation of the face and 
a fictitious grivity — a longer and more emphatic pro- 
nunciati >n of certain words, rather than Scriptural 
knowledge, liu nility, spirituality, zeal and Christian 
affection, with great devotion and great philanthropy, 
were the grand desiderata. 

" Along with these drawbacks, they had as few mSans 
of acquiring Christian knowledge as they had either 
taste or leisure for it. They had but one, two, or, at 
the most, three sermons, and these were either delivered 
in one uniform style and order, or minced down into 
one niidley by way of variety. Of course, then, unless 
they had an exuberant zeal for the truth as the} r under- 
stood it, they were not of the calibre, temper or attain- 
ments to relish or seek after mental enlargement or 
independence. I could not, therefore, esteem them, nor 
court their favor by offering any incense at their shrine. 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 181 

I resolved to have nothing especially to do with them 
more than with other preachers and teachers. The 
clergy of my acquaintance in other parties of that day 
were, as they believed, educated men, and called the 
Baptists illiterate and uncouth men, without either 
learning or academic accomplishments or polish. They 
trusted to a moderate portion of Latin, Greek and met- 
aphysics, together with a synopsis of divinity, ready- 
made in suits for every man's stature, at a reasonable 
price. They were as proud of their classic lore and the 
marrow of modern divinity, as the Baptist was of his 
'mode of baptism,' and his 'proper subject' with sover- 
eign grace, total depravity, and final perseverance. 

"I confess, however, that I was better pleased with 
the Baptist people than with any other community. 
They read the Bible, and seemed to care for little else 
in religion than 'conversion' and 'Bible doctrine.' 
They often sent for us and pressed us to preach for 
them. We visited some of their churches, and, on ac- 
quaintance, liked the people more and the preachers 
less. Still I feared that I might be unreasonable, and 
by education prejudiced against them, and thought that 
I must visit their Association at Uniontown, Pa., in the 
autumn of 1812. I went there as an auditor and spec- 
tator, and returned more disgusted than when I went. 
They invited me 'to preach,' but I declined it alto- 
gether, except one evening in a private family, to some 
dozen preachers and twice as many laymen. I returned 
home, not intending ever to visit another Association. 

'•On ray return home, however, I learned that the 
Baptists themselves did not appreciate the preaching of 
the preachers of that meeting. They regarded the 
speakers as worse than usual, and their discourses as 
not edifying — as too much after the style of John Gill 



182 A. CAMPBELL UNITES WITH THE BAPTISTS. 

and Tucker's theory of predestination. They pressed 
me from every quarter to visit their churches, and, 
though not a member, to preach for them. I often 
spoke to the Baptist congregations for sixty miles 
around. They all pressed us to join their Redstone As- 
sociation. We laid the matter before the Church in 
the fall of 1813. We discussed the propriety of the 
measure. After much discussion and earnest desire to 
be directed by the wisdom which cometh from above, 
we finally concluded to make an overture to that effect, 
and to write out a full view of our sentiments, wishes 
and determinations on that subject. We did so in some 
eight or ten pages of large dimensions, exhibiting our 
remonstrance against all human creeds as bonds of com- 
munion or union amongst Christian churches, and 
expressing a willingness, upon certain conditions, to co- 
operate or unite with that Association, provided always 
that we should be allowed to teach and preach whatever 
w r e learned from the Holy Scriptures, regardless of any 
creed or formula in Christendom. A copy of this doc- 
ument, we regret to say, was not preserved, and, when 
solicited from the clerk of the Association, was refused. 
"The proposition was discussed at the Association, 
and, after much debate, was decided by a considerable 
majority in favor of our being received. Thus a union 
was formed. But the party opposed, though small, 
began early to work, and continued with a perse- 
verance worthy of a better cause. There was an 
Elder Pritchard, of Cross Creek, Virginia; an Elder 
Brownfleld, of Uniontown, Penn.; an Elder Stone, of 
Ohio, and his son Elder Stone, of the Monongahela 
region, that seemed to have confederated to oppose our 
influence. But they, for three years, could do nothing. 
We boldly argued for the Bible, for the New Testament 



REFURM.ATURV MOVEMENTS. l&i 

Christianity, vex, harass, discompose whom it might. 
We felt the strength of our cause of reform on every 
indication of opposition, and constantly grew in favor 
with the people. Things passed along without any 
prominent interest for some two or three years." 

The next Redstone Association convened at Cross 
Creek, August 30, 1816. A. Campbell was nominated, 
with others, as one of the speakers for the occasion. 
Some of thp jealous-minded ministers of the Association 
opposed the nomination, but the opposition was over- 
ruled l>y other members of that body. When it came 
Campbell's turn to preach, he selected for his topic the 
following words, as quoted from Rom. viii. 3: "For 
what the law could not do^ in that it was weak through 
the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of 
sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh." 
This was the young polemic's famous " Sermon on the 
Law,'* which subsequently created such wonderful ex 
citement in the Baptist community. It was the sudden 
explosion, in the Baptist camp, of an apostolic bomb- 
shell. Even during its delivery, as soon as Elder 
Pritchard and other opposing preachers perceived its 
drift, they used every means openly to manifest their 
disapprobation A lady in the congregation having 
fainted, Elder Pritchard rushed into the stand, called 
out some of the preachers, and created great disturb- 
ance in the large assembly, apparently with a design of 
distracting the attention of the eager listeners. As 
might be expected, much misrepresentation followed 
the delivery of this discourse. It was on account of 
these misrepresentations that Mr. Campbell thought it 
best, soon afterward, to publish this revolutionary ser- 
mon in pamphlet form, as the most effectual means of 
refutation. The sermon is published in full in the 



184 A. CAMPBELL UNITES WITH THE BAPTISTS. 

Millennial Harbinger for 1846. It is certainly a re- 
markable production, which is too lengthy to reproduce 
upon these pages. His method of analysis was as fol- 
lows: 

1. Ascertain what ideas we are to attach to the phrase 
"the law" in this and similar portions of the sacred 
Scriptures. "1. Point out those things which the law 
could not accomplish. 3. Demonstrate the reason why 
the law tailed to accomplish these objects. 4. Illustrate 
how God has remedied these relative defects of the law. 
5. In the hist place, deduce such conclusions from these 
premises as must obviously and necessarily present 
themselves to every unbiased and reflecting mind. 

Measured by the Philadelphia Confession of Faith, 
this sermon, in the estimation of those bigoted Baptists, 
was most unorthodox and mischievously heterodox. 
And these clergy were the more incensed because they 
found themselves incapable of answering the points 
taken in the sermon. The object of the sermon was, 
by contrasting the law of Moses with the gospel of 
Christ, by contrasting the Old Covenant with the New 
Covenant — by showing the difference between "the let- 
ter that kills" and "the law of the Spirit" that gives 
life — to convince his hearers that they could not be 
saved and justified by any system of things not author- 
ized by Jesus Christ, the Head of the Church, and not 
proclaimed by his apostles. This sermon invoked the 
wrath of some of the Baptist clergy, and stirred up 
vengeful and uncompromising opposition. Subsequent 
to the presentation of this unanswerable address, this 
Baptist Association, for several consecutive years, by 
means of a self-constituted ecclesiastical court, brought 
charges of heretical teachings against Thomas and 
Alexander Campbell. Whenever their persecutors 
failed to sustain the charge of heresy, they would 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 185 

attempt to tamper with the ignorance and prejudices of 
members under their influence, and by pursuing this 
unchristian course lessen the unanimity of the churches 
in favor of the defendants in the case, and increase the 
chances of success in their ultimate excommunication 
from the Baptist communion. The two Campbells, 
foreseeing that it was the fixed intention of their mis- 
chievous persecutors to gain a majority of votes in 
favor of their excommunication, severed their connec- 
tion and withdrew from the Redstone Baptist Associa- 
tion, and united themselves with the Mahoning Baptist 
Association, in Eastern Ohio, and by this step frustrated 
the preconcerted schemes of their malignant opponents. 
This Association, being much more enlightened and 
liberal in their views of the truth, received the two re- 
formers, with other delegates from the feeble churches, 
with much cordiality and Christian affection. This 
Association received them upon the New Testament 
platform alone, to the exclusion of all human creeds 
and "church standards." 
16 



A SIMILAR REFORMATION IS KENTUCKY 



At the time the Campbells were urging reformation 
in the Presbyterian churches in Western Pennsylvania, 
tit ere was a movement, similar in character, going tor- 
ward in Kentucky, led by Barton W. Stone, a man of 
great intellectual force and possessed of rare zeal and 
devotion. Both Alexander Campbell and B. \V\ Stone 
sought to accomplish the same ends by the same means. 
Both, almost simultaneously, having discarded all hu- 
man creeds, sought Christian union exclusively upon 
the basis of the Bible. By comparing notes, it was dis- 
covered that both were opposed to creeds as terms of 
communion ; that both desired to propagate only the 
primitive gospel; that hoth were alike persecuted and 
maligned by those who, glorying in orthodoxy of opin- 
ion, failed to recognize a scriptural unity of faith; and 
that both, after they came to understand the sentiments 
of each other, repudiating the despotism of opinion- 
ism, accepted only of faith that was founded upon in- 
disputable testimony. In Kentucky, the adherents of 
Campbell were called "Reformers," while at the same 
time the adherents of Stone were known as "Chris- 
tians," or ' ' Christ-mn$. " The followers of Stone had 
been charged with holding the doctrine of Arianism, 
hut by intercourse with Stone and others, Campbell 
discovered that the charges were unjast and untrue. 
Campbell advocated fellowship with all who received 

(186) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 187 

the teachings of the Scriptures in their simple and ob- 
vious meaning, and whose conduct corresponded with 
these teachings. Lie held that there was no need of 
strained interpretations, no need of specious glosses or 
textual perversions where no theological theory was to 
be sustained, but where all could learn the truth by tak- 
ing the Bible in its proper connections, and construing 
it in harmony with the established laws of language and 
rules of interpretation. He held that the simple truths 
of the gospel could be received by babes in Christ, and 
that upon these common truths all could be united in 
one body. In short, the guiding principles of Camp- 
bell were substantially the same as those which guided 
the actions of Stone. Both were alike devoted to the 
great end of uniting the true followers of Christ into 
one communion upon the Bible alone, but, at first, each 
regarded the method of its accomplishment from his own 
angle of vision; and since Campbell contemplated the 
distinct congregations, with their proper functionaries, 
as the highest religious executive authority on earth, he 
was in doubt as to how a, formal union could be attained, 
whether by a general convention of messengers or by a 
general assembly of the people. Suffice it to say, that 
the coalescing of the two peoples was brought about 
through the spirit of Christ and of brotherly love. 

Some notable men fell into the wake of the reform- 
atory movement of B. W. Stone, such as Samuel and 
John Rogers, Thomas M. Allen, ¥. R. Palmer and John 
Allen Gano — all grand characters — and all of whom, in 
subsequent years, distinguished themselves as advocates 
for a restoration of the apostolic order of things. A 
union of the "Christians" and " Reformers," or between 
the " Christian Church'- and the Church of the " Re- 
formers," was directly secured through the agency of 



188 A SIMILAR REFORMATION IN KENTUCKY. 

John T. Johnson, a man of rare self-denial, a man of 
noble Christian integrity, as well as a natural orator. 
Johnson was originally a Baptist, but after examining 
in the light of the Bible what was vulgarly denominated 
"Campbellism," he separated from the Baptists, and, in 
18-31, he formed the nucleus of a congregation of six on 
the basis of the Bilde. kSoon after abandoning the lu- 
crativo practice of law, he began the public advocacy of 
the primitive gospel. Becoming intimately acquainted 
with B. W. Stone, who lived near Georgetown, he was 
urged by the latter to become co-editor of the Christian 
Messenger, to which he agreed at the close of 1831. This 
j»aper was conducted in the interests of Christian union. 
Johnson found that a union in sentiment and religious 
aims already existed between the two peoples — the 
'^Christians" and *' Reformers" — to a large extent. The 
consummation of the union is thus described by Prof. 
Richardson in his Memoirs of A. Campbell: 

This editorial union of B. W. Stone and John T. 
Johnson was soon followed by a fraternal union between 
the l * Christian" Church and that of the ''Reformers" 
meeting in Georgetown. Agreeing to worship together, 
they found so much agreement in all essential matters, and 
so happy an efiect produced in the increased number of 
conversions, Unit they were induced near the close of 1831 
to appoint a general meeting at Georgetown to continue 
four days, for the purpose of considering the subject of 
a complete union between the two people. This meet- 
ing included Christmas Day, and a similar one was ap- 
pointed for the following week, including New Year's 
Day, at Lexington. Many of the leading preachers on 
both sides attended and took part in these meetings, and 
so much evidence was afforded of mutual Christian love 
and confidence, and such undoubted assurances were 
given of a firm determination on the part of all to have 
nothing to do with doctrinal speculations, but to accept 
as conclusive upon all subjects the simple teachings of 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 189 

the Bible, that there seemed to be no longer anything 
iu the way of the most earnest and hearty co-operation. 
After the meeting at Lexington, some further friendly 
conferences were held by means of committees, and, by 
arrangement, the members of both churches communed 
togetiier on the 19th of February, agreeing to consum- 
mate the formal and public union of the two churches 
on the following Lord's Day, the 26th. During the 
week, however, some began to fear a difficulty in rela- 
tion to the choice of elders and the practical adoption 
of weekly communion, which they thought would re- 
quire the constant presence of an ordained administra- 
tor. The person who generally ministered to the Chris- 
tian Church at Lexington at this time was Thomas 
Smith, a man of more than ordinary abilities and at- 
tainments, ami long associated with the movement of B. 
W. Stone. He was an excellent preacher, and was con- 
sidered a skillful debater. He possessed withal a very 
amiable disposition, and was highly esteemed by Mr. 
Campbell, whom he of en accompanied during his visits 
in Kentucky. He was at first, like others, apprehensive 
that the proposed union was premature, and that dis- 
agreement might arise in regard to questions of church 
order. The union was therefore postponed, and matters 
remained for a short time stationary; btit it soon be- 
came generally apparent that there were no exclusive 
privileges belonging to preachers as it concerned the ad- 
ministration of ordinances, and Thomas M. Allen com- 
ing to Lexington, induced them to complete the union 
and to transfer to the new congregation, thus formed 
under the title of "the Church of Christ," the comfort- 
able meeting-house which they had previously held 
under the designation of "the Christian Church." This 
wise measure secured entire unanimity, and was espe- 
cially gratifying to the ''Reformers," who had been 
meeting in a rented building. At Paris, also, Mr. Albm 
succeeded in effecting a union between the two churches, 
for one of which he had himself been preaching, while 
James Challen at this time ministered to the other. He 
proposed that both he and Air. Challen should retire, 



190 A SIMILAR REFORMATION IN KENTUCKY. 

and that the united churches should engage permanently 
the services of Aylette Raines. This was accordingly 
done, and Mr. Raines, leaving his field in Ohio, from 
this time continued to preach for the church at Paris, 
as well as for other churches in Kentucky, for more than 
twenty years, aiding besides in numerous protracted 
meetings, and by his steady, unremitting labors and 
able advocacy of the Reformation principles greatly ex- 
tending their influence." — Memoirs of A. Campbell, pp. 
383-85. 

There were present at the Lexington Conference: B. 
W. Stone, John F. Johnson, John (Raccoon) Smith, 
John Rogers, G. W. Elley and Jacob Creath, Jr. — all 
notable men. The adherents of Stone did not all follow 
him, and some of his brethren censured him for the 
course he had pursued. However, in the course of time, 
the great majority were absorbed in the common plea 
for Christian union. B. W. Stone had been raised a 
Presbyterian. He began his plea for Christian union 
upon the basis of the Bible in 1804, eight years before 
Alexander Campbell was immersed. 

It is a noteworthy fact that at the very time when 
these events were transpiring in Kentucky, the same 
spirit of union was prevailing over sectarianism and 
bigotry and prejudice in other States also. John Long- 
ley, of Rush County, Indiana, under date of the 24th of 
December, 1831, says: 

The Reforming Baptists and we are all one here. We 
hope that the dispute between you and Bro. Campbell, 
about names and priority, will forever cease, and that you 
will go on, united, to reform the world. 

.Griffith Cathej 7 , of Tennessee, on the 4th of January, 

1832, writes substantially as follows : 

The members of the Church of Christ, and the mem- 
bers known by the name of Disciples, or Reformed 
Baptists, regardless of all charges about Trinitarianism, 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 191 

Arianism and Soeinianism, and of the questions whether 
it is possible for any person to get to heaven without 
immersion, or whether immersion is for the remission 
of sins, have come forward, given the right hand of fel- 
lowship, and united upon the plain and simple gospel. 

Alexander Campbell, by his commanding talents, by 
his great force of character and by liis invincible cour- 
age, overshadowed all other reformers, and at once, by 
common consent of all parties, became the acknowl- 
edged champion— the admired leader — of the great on- 
slaught upon the sectarian world. B. W. Stone died at 
the age of eighty-four, after having spent his life in 
laboring incessantly for the union of God's people. lie 
was a grand character, a man of noble instincts, of su- 
perior intelligence, and greatly loved and admired for 
his unselfish and philanthropic devotion to the cause of 
Christ. He lives in history as one of the most distin 
guished factors in the greatest religious revolution of 
modern times. 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST IDENTIFIED. 



By degrees the Baptist Mahoning Association lost its 
legislative and ecclesiastical character, under the reforma- 
tory movements of the Campbells and their coadjutors, 
and the ministers of a free people, heretofore living under 
the influence of this Association, gradually lost their affec- 
tion for human tradition and theological speculations, 
which had been made tests of Christian fellowship; so 
that, in due course of time, by learning how to use the 
rules of Bible interpretation — how to quote and apply 
Scriptures — how to distinguish the law from the gospel 
— how to distinguish the Jewish from the Christian dis- 
pensation, and the Patriarchal from the Jewish — this 
Association entirely lost its distinctive ecclesiastical 
features, and was finally absorbed by the "Big Meet- 
ings" of the "Western Reserve." 

It never was in the mind of either Thomas or Alex- 
ander Campbell to start a new sect; indeed, as we have 
already shown, they disclaimed, and abhorred the very 
idea; they simply sought reformation within their own 
ranks, as did the reformers of the three preceding cen- 
turies. But now, under the guidance of a gracious 
Providence, having broken away from all traditional 
trammels — the principles of the "Declaration and Ad- 
dress" pushing them to the front by logical necessity — 
having escaped the clerical yoke of spiritual bondage — 
and having accepted the Bible as their only safe and in- 
fallible guide, and acknowledging Jesus the Christ as 

their only infallible lawmaker and legislator, these illus- 

(192) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 193 

trious reformers, with other mighty men of influence 
and eloquence, from the Protestant denominations, from 
this time forward hegan to advocate, not simply church 
reformation — which was all that the earlier reformers 
sought to accomplish — but an entire restoration of the 
apostolic order of things. They now resolved to go hack 
beyond Philadelphia, beyond Oxford, beyond Westmin- 
ster, beyond Geneva, beyond Augsburg, beyond Heidel- 
berg, beyond Rome, and back to Jerusalem, and there 
begin a new survey of the great domain of apostolic 
Christianity. Accordingly, it was not long until the 
Christian Baptist, and other contemporaneous periodi- 
cals, were started to advocate this plea; a Bible college 
was organized in the interest of this plea; a host of elo- 
quent preachers entered body and soul into the work, 
and, as a consequence, converts from the world and 
from sectariandom were made by thousands. 

If Martin Luther wrested the Bible out of the hands 
of the Roman priesthood, and gave it to the people — 
which had been a sealed book to the masses — Alexan- 
der Campbell did a mightier work by wresting from the 
hands of the Papal and Protestant clergy false keys of 
Bible interpretation, while at the same time he restored 
to the people the only correct and approved rules of in- 
terpretation, which, without the aid of the private and 
mystic explanations of especially "called and sent 
preachers," would enable them to understand the Word 
of God for themselves. He taught the people how to 
read the Scriptures intelligently, and how to "accu- 
rately divide the word of truth." He showed how 
necessary it is to know ivhere a thing was done, when it 
was done, how it was done, and by whom it was done|; 
whether the person speaking was a Jew or a Christian; 
whether the persons addressed were saints or sinners; 
17 



194 THE CHURCH OF CHRIST IDENTIFIED. 

whether under the Old Covenant, or under the New 
Covenant; whether the speakers were discussing the 
law, or the gospel; whether those who wrote had refer- 
ence to the Church of Christ, or to the " church that 
was set up in the wilderness" by Moses; or whether 
the gospel in fact was first preached by Abraham, or by 
the apostles of Jesus Christ; or whether the law of par- 
don, in relation to the sinner, emanated from Moses, a 
fallible man, or from Jesus of Nazareth, the divine Son 
of God. 

Following the motto that " where the Bible speaks, we 
speak; where the Bible is silent, we are silent" Alexander 
Campbell, both in preaching and writing, showed the 
difference between facts and opinions — between per- 
sonal knowledge — the knowledge of the senses — and 
faith founded on testimony. He utterly repudiated the 
idea that the opinions of men should be made tests of 
Christian fellowship. These he regarded as only pri- 
vate property, and that, as such, they should be always 
held in abeyance, and never be intraded into the do- 
main of fact and faith. He simplified the whole matter 
by showing that facts are to be believed, commands to 
be obeyed, and the promises of the gospel to be enjoyed. 
The commonest mind could apprehend these simple but 
grand divisions of the scheme of redemption. 

He showed that the plan of salvation was a divine 
and sublime and glorious unity — that there is "one 
Lord, one faith, and one baptism," and that"£Ae doc- 
trine of Christ" is a proposition altogether different 
from the "doctrines of men," and from the "doctrines 
of demons. " He contended — and his arguments remain 
unassailable to the present day — that the Bible, and the 
Bible only, can be made the basis of Christian unity, 
and that no unity, either in form or in spirit, can ever 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. VJo 

take place until all creeds, Confessions of Faith, 
" Church Standards," and denominational titles — such 
as Episcopal, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, Metho- 
dist and Roman Catholic — shall be removed out of the 
way. All these are divisive of the "one body," of 
which body Christ is the one living and all-animating 
Head. 

Campbell insisted that Bible things should be inculca- 
ted in Bible words, that all theological terminologies 
should be abandoned, and that the nomenclature of 
scholastic schools should be rejected, as only serving to 
confuse and discourage "the common people who gladly 
hear the word," and who can not comprehend meta- 
physics, theological abstractions, and inferential deduc- 
tions. He taught — as do the "Disciples of Christ" 
now uniformly — that "the gospel is the power of God 
unto salvation, and that God has revealed no power 
above and beyond the gospel, as essential to enlighten- 
ment and conviction of sin. He did not limit the 
power of the Spirit, but he maintained that we have no 
right to pry into mysteries which the Almighty Father 
has not revealed. " Secret things belong to God, but 
revealed things to us and our children." 

He taught that the revealed promises of God are the 
only evidences of pardon in our possession, and while 
relying implicitly and unequivocally upon the Word of 
God, he rejected all sensuous evidence of pardon, such 
as psychological impressions, dreams, apparitions, su- 
pernatural visitations, ecstasies: all of which supersti- 
tious notions were prevailing at the time when — 
seventy years ago — the Campbells proposed to abandon 
the sectarian world and return to the Bible and apostolic 
teaching. Of course, as a consequence of the principles 
which they adopted, they could do no other than throw 



l^ti 'THE CHUECH OT CHRIST IDENTIFIED. 

overboard, as lumber of the mystical and monkish ages, 
all speculative theories of conversion — the doctrine of 
direct supernatural agency — and show, by apostolic 
teaching, that it is the moral power of divine truth, as 
exerted through the gospel, that changes the moral 
nature of man. 

By an appeal to the New Testament, they showed 
that the working of miracles, by the apostles, was de- 
signed as a "confirmation of the word," as revealed by 
the Holy Spirit, but that in no place is it recorded that 
a miracle ever changed the heart of a sinner. "Signs,'' 
says Paul, "are not for them that believe, but for them 
that believe not.'" The sinner is saved by faith in Jesus 
the Christ, and by obedience to the conditions of the 
gospel. 

Giving up infant baptism, while they were yet Pres- 
byterians in name, by a direct course, through Bible in- 
vestigation, they came to that point, where, in the 
absence of all testimony, they were obliged to surrender 
both rantism and affusion, as being without the least 
authority in the Word of God. 

While accepting all the measures of reform as accom- 
plished by Luther, Zwingle, Calvin, Melancthon, John 
Wesley and Roger Williams, which were accomplished 
in harmony with the inspired Scriptures, Alexander 
Campbell, and those royal spirits co-operating with 
him, laid aside as impracticable all the theological spec- 
ulations and false dogmas of those reformers, with all 
their contradictory deductions from human reason, un- 
supported by a "Thus saith the Lord." 

Having fully committed himself to a "Restoration of 
the Ancient Order of Things," Alexander Campbell en- 
countered, in the outset, three popular systems of 
denominational justification, all of which, while being 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 197 

essentially the same in principle, flatly contradict the 
Word of God. These were Calvinism, Arminianism 
and Universalism. The central idea of the first is this: 
That God had from all eternity decreed the salvation of 
his own elect few, whose number can neither be in- 
creased nor diminished, while condemning all the rest 
of mankind to eternal reprobation. And further, that 
man being totally depraved, and incapable of any voli- 
tion toward good thoughts or good deeds, can only be 
renewed in life by the irresistible grace of God. The 
second theory embraces this idea: That, as it is impos- 
sible for man to repent of his sins, until he receives the 
gift of faith direct from heaven, he must remain in his 
sins until God, in his own good time, sends down the 
Holy Spirit to regenerate him. Man can do nothing. 
God must do all ; man must wait, and if God chooses 
not to visit him, he is lost. The third theory is to this 
effect: That God has from all eternity decreed the sal- 
vation of all men, and that all men, without the loss of 
one soul, will be made finally holy and happy. Take 
either one of these systems, and it is clear to be seen 
that man has nothing at all to do in securing his own 
salvation — that his salvation or condemnation is wholly 
in the hands of a stern and implacable God; that salva- 
tion is entirely unconditional; that man is wholly and 
helplessly passive, and therefore irresponsible. Campbell 
held that if these systems are in harmony with the moral 
government of God, then is man not a free moral agent- 
that there is no virtue in preaching the gospel; that 
there is no need of a Mediator, and that a remedial 
scheme is a superfluity, if not an absolute myth. 

The effects of the religious revolution inaugurated by 
the Campbells were not foreseen by them and their co- 
adjutors. Their steps evidently were guided by the 



198 THE CHURCH OF CHRIST IDENTIFIED. 

providence of God; and now there is not a pulpit or a 
religious journal in the land, that has not either directly 
or indirectly been influenced by the plea of those godly 
men, to reject many of the grosser forms of a perverted 
Christianity. On the question of Christian union — 
toward the consummation of which grand object Alex- 
ander Campbell gave the undivided energies of his 
eventful life — there is now a rapidly-growing sentiment 
among all good men in the various denominations. 
Campbell held that all denominations never could unite 
as one spiritual body — neither as Presbyterians, nor as 
Episcopalians, nor as Lutherans, nor as Methodists, nor 
as Baptists, nor upon any other sectarian name; but 
that they could unite as Christians, that being designa- 
ted as the scriptural name of the followers of Christ, 
the Founder of the Church. He held that all these 
t!i 1 1 rcli titles were of purely human origin, that they 
tended continually toward carnality and the seculariza- 
tion of divine things, and that as central ideas of church 
polities — each polity antagonizing every other polity — 
they contradict the last intercessory prayer of our Sav- 
ior, who prayed that all his disciples might be of one 
mind and heart; that as he and his Father are one, so 
his disciples might be one with them, that the world 
might believe that he is the Messiah — Christ himself 
representing the one true vine, and his disciples the 
branches, which fact forever excludes the idea that de- 
nominations constitute "branches" of the u one body." 
When Christ said, "Upon this rock I will build my 
Church," the conception of a Papal or Protestant 
Church, or a Gallican or Anglican Church, was not 
present in his mind. So many diverse bodies can not 
possibly possess the Spirit of Christ. The spirit of man 
is in them, and hence they can not be divine. 



THE RESTORATION OF APOSTOLIC CHRIS- 
TIANITY. 



In closing our series of articles on Reformatory Move- 
ments, we propose to give the results of the religious 
revolution as inaugurated by Alexander Campbell. 

It has been made evident by the numerous facts which 
we have heretofore narrated, that Campbell worked him- 
self out of spiritual Babylon by a thorough investiga- 
tion of the Scriptures, and that he abandoned all Prot- 
estant sects because he could not find the basis of 
Christian union in any one of them. He faithfully 
followed the logic of God's Word to the end. He dis- 
carded the deductions of human reason as a logical ne- 
cessity, and settled all controversies by a direct appeal to 
the law and authority of Jesus the Christ. He estab- 
lished the proposition that Jesus Christ is the only be- 
gotten Son of God, by the most majestic and incontro- 
vertible arguments that were ever penned by mortal 
man. His arguments on the divinity of Christ stand 
before the world without a parallel. His theses on the 
Person of Christ, as Prophet, Priest and King, and as 
the only Savior of men, and as the only hope of the 
world, have never been excelled. He showed that sal- 
vation from sin is not in subscription to creeds or dog- 
mas; not in joining some orthodox Church; not in in. 
dorsing the opinions of men, however hoary with age ; 

(199) 



200 THE RESTORATION OF APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY. 

but in a person, in the Person of Christ: that "all the 
promises of God are in him yea, and in him amen." 

The ground of assurance we occupy may now he 
briefly stated : 

I. Our creed is the Inspired Word of God; no more, 
no less. 

II. We believe with all the heart that the Word of 
God — the Plan of Salvation — was miraculously revealed 
by the Holy Spirit, and that the revealed word was 
confirmed by miraculous attestations of divine power. 

III. We believe that the gospel — which consists of 
the death, burial and resurrection of Christ — is the power 
of God unto salvation to every one who believes it and 
obeys it. 

IV. Accepting of no theory of regeneration, and dis- 
carding alike all mystical influences and all scholastic 
vagaries, we believe that sinners who are brought under 
the power of the truth, are begotten of the Word of God 
— are begotten through the gospel — are made alive by the 
truth, and born of water. 

V. We believe that immersion, preceded by genuine 
faith in Jesus Christ as the Savior of men, and preceded 
by genuine repentance toward God, is, if done in the 
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
Spirit, for the remission of past sins, and that it is the 
consummating act in the divine process of salvation. 

VI. Taking the Scriptures as our infallible guide in 
all spiritual things, we believe that the heart of the siu- 
ner is changed by the truth contained in the Scriptures, 
and that it is the moral power of God found in the di- 
vine testimonies, which, when brought to bear upon the 
sinner's heart, changes his moral nature, and makes him 
a "new creature" in Christ Jesus. We believe that the 
truth, as revealed by the Holy Spirit, was intended by 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 201 

the heavenly Father to "convince the world of sin, of 
righteousness, and of judgment to come;" that in con- 
version, the Holy Spirit is the agent, and the word re- 
vealed by the Spirit the instrument. We believe that it 
is the Word of God, wielded by the Spirit, that does the 
execution, and that it is the Word of G-od, as the sword 
of the Spirit, that slays the sinner and destroys his love 
of sin. As we do not believe in the efficacy of the word 
without the presence of the Spirit, neither do we believe 
in a direct mystical operation of the Spirit without the 
presence of the word in the sinner's heart. 

VII. We believe that the act of pardon takes place 
in the mind of God, and not in the sinner's heart; and 
we know this to be so, because the conditions of pardon 
are found recorded in the revealed will of God. We 
do not believe that a sinner — by the mere testimony of 
his feelings — has a personal consciousness of the pardon 
of his sins. Remission of sins is purely a matter of 
faith in the promises of God, and not a mere matter of 
conscious feeling , as produced by a psychological state of 
heart or affections. It is the love of God that changes 
the sinner's heart, and it is the truth that convicts the 
sinner of sin; and it is God who remits sin through 
obedience to the gospel. Of course, we here only pro- 
pose to give statements, not arguments. 

VIII. We do not pretend to limit the power of the 
Holy Spirit, but, in the absence of testimony, we can 
not believe that there is a superadded power, beyond 
and apart from the gospel, necessary to the conviction 
of the sinner. Such a speculation was never even hint- 
ed at by Christ and his apostles. In all doctrinal mat- 
ters, and in ail questions of commands and personal 
obedience, "where the Bible speaks, we speak; and 
where the Bible is silent, we are silent." We are, there- 



202 THE RESTORATION OF APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY. 

fore, as much bound to respect the silence of the Bible, 
as we are bound to honor its utterances. 

IX. We believe that God only acknowledges one 
body of believers, and that all converted men, in order 
to become members of the one body of Christ, must, by 
the teachings of the Holy Spirit, be "immersed into the 
one body." We designate the one body, of which Christ 
is the one all-animating Head, the Church of Christ, 
because the body is constituted of those who believe in 
Christ, obey Christ, and walk in Christ. We call our- 
selves Christians, because Christ is our only King and 
lawgiver, and him only do we propose to follow. We 
call ourselves the Disciples of Christ, because we learn 
only from Christ and his apostles. 

X. In church edification, in worship, in disciplinary 
matters, and in the weekly communion, we take the 
New Testament as our only rule of faith and practice. 

There are some things we do not believe, because not 
authorized and sustained by the Word of God. 

1. We do not believe in sectarian churches, nor in 
Protestant denominationalism, nor in the Roman Cath- 
olic Church, or any other Church that has an existence 
without the sanction of God's Word. 

2. We do not believe in human creeds, in speculative 
dogmas, in theories of regeneration, in the mourning- 
bench business, in dreams and apparitions, in phantasies 
and ecstasies, nor in sensuous feelings, as guides in the 
way of obedience and of a divine life. 

3. We do not believe in a direct, special, irresistible 
theory of regeneration. 

4. We do not believe in infant baptism, nor in affu- 
sion, nor rantism. We have good reason to believe that 
they originated in an apostate Church. 

5. We do not believe in a Roman Church, nor in an 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 203 

Episcopal Church, nor in a Lutheran Church, nor in a 
Presbyterian Church, nor in a Paptist Church, nor in a 
Methodist Church, nor in any other Church, not known 
in the apostolic age. We do not believe in any human 
organization as a substitute for the Church of the living 
God. 

6. We do not believe that persons who have never 
been immersed into Jesus Christ — into the death of 
Christ — into the one body — are members of the one 
body. 

7. We do not believe that morality, no matter how 
high its character or how highly prized by men, will 
save a soul from eternal death, without the righteous- 
ness of Christ, and without the righteousness of God. 

8. We do not believe that God will save men by faith 
alone, or by repentance alone, or by baptism alone, or 
by grace alone, or by works alone. We believe that 
God will save men who sustain the relation of a Chris- 
tian, and who have the character of a Christian. This 
is inclusive of all possible good. 

9. We do not believe in a Papal form of church gov- 
ernment, nor in an Episcopal form of church govern- 
ment, nor in a Presbyterial form of church government; 
but we do believe in the independency of every congre- 
gation, as regards church government, and in the sov- 
ereign right of every congregation to choose its own 
officers, such as elders and deacons. We also believe 
that while the congregations maintain a separate gov- 
ernmental independency, they are at the same time spir- 
itually and sympathetically united in Christ as one har- 
monious body, and that they are mutually bound to 
co-operate in the accomplishment of the same grand 
objects, especially in proclaiming the glad tidings of 



204 THE RESTORATION OF APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY. 

salvation and establishing congregations according to 
the apostolic model. 

What we have now mapped out as the ground we 
occupy, we are thoroughly convinced is truly the apos- 
tolic ground, and a ground of unity about which there 
can be no intelligent controversy. The ground we oc- 
cupy excludes all sectarianism. All the people of God 
may occupy this ground. We invite all men to receive 
the same Bible we receive ; to accept the same creed we 
accept; to honor the same Lord we honor; to obey the 
same gospel we obey; to bear the same scriptural titles 
we bear; to "walk by the same rules," to "mind the 
same things," to "speak the same things," to be "joined 
together in the same judgment," to contend earnestly 
for the same faith. 



HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 



Many writers, Protestant as well as Romanist, have 
regarded the assembly of the apostles and elders of 
Jerusalem, of which we read in Acts xv., as the first 
ecclesiastical council, and the model on which others 
were formed, in accordance, as they suppose, with a 
divine command or apostolic institution. But this view 
of the subject is unsupported by the testimony of the 
apostolic times, and is at variance with the opinions of 
the earliest writers, who refer to the councils of the 
Church. Tertullian speaks of the ecclesiastical assem- 
blies of the Asiatic and European Greeks as a human 
institution; and in a letter written by Firmilian, Bishop 
of Csesarea, to Cyprian, about the middle of the third 
century, the same custom is referred to merely as a con- 
venient arrangement existing at that time among the 
churches of Asia Minor for common deliberation on 
matters of extraordinary importance. Besides this, it 
will be discovered, upon examination, that the councils 
of the Church were assemblages of altogether a differ- 
ent nature from that of the apostles; the only point in 
which the alleged model was really imitated being, per- 
haps, the form of the preface to the decree, " It has 
seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us." (Studien u. 
Kritiken, 1842, i. 102 sq.) 

A council is an assembly of bishops or pastors called 
together for the discussion and regulation of ecclesias- 

(205) 



206 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

tical affairs. The beginning of the system of church 
councils is traced to the meeting of the apostles and 
elders at Jerusalem, as recorded in Acts xv. This, as 
mentioned above, is generally considered to be the first 
council; but it differed from all others in this circum- 
stance, that it was under the special guidance of the 
Holy Spirit. Roman Catholic writers speak of four 
Apostolical Councils, viz: Acts i. 13, for the election 
of an apostle; Acts vi., to choose deacons; Acts xv., 
the one named above; Acts xxi. 18 sq. But none of 
these had a public and general character, except the 
one in Acts xv. (Schaff History of Christian Church ii. 
sec. 65). Although the gospel was soon after propaga^ 
ted in many parts of Europe, Asia and Africa, there is 
not a particle of evidence to show that any public 
meeting of Christians was held for the purpose of dis- 
cussing any contested point until the middle of the 
second century. From that time councils became fre- 
quent; but as they consisted only of those who belonged 
to particular districts or countries, they are usually 
termed diocesan, provincial, patriarchal or national coun- 
cils, in contradistinction to oecumenical or general councils. 
%. e., supposed to comprise delegates or commissioners 
from all the churches in the Christian world, and conse- 
quently supposed to represent the Church universal. 

According to Dr. Schaff, the word oecumenical occurs 
first in the sixth canon of Constantinople, A. D. 381. 
Bat no such assembly was held, or could be held, before 
the establishment of the Christian religion over the 
ruins of paganism in the Roman Empire. Their title 
to represent the whole Christian world is not valid. 
After the fourth century the "lower clergy and the 
laity" were entirely excluded from the councils, and 
bishops only admitted. The number of bishops gath- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 207 

ered at the greatest of the councils, constituted but a 
small portion of the number who claimed to be bishops. 
The oecumenical councils which are generally admitted 
to bear that title most justly were rather Greek than 
general councils. In the strict and proper sense of the 
term, therefore, no oecumenical council has ever been 
held. There are seven councils admitted by both the 
Greek and Latin churches as oecumenical, to which 
number the Roman Catholics add twelve, making nine- 
teen in all, which we now shall notice in their regular 
historical order. 

I, APOSTOLICAL COUNCIL. 

This council convened in Jerusalem, A. D. 47, and, 
according to the meaning of the term, is the only coun- 
cil mentioned in the New Testament. The conversion 
of Cornelius having thrown open the Church of Christ 
to the Gentiles, many uncircumcised persons were soon 
gathered into the congregation formed at Autioch under 
the labors of Paul and Barnabas; but, on the visit of 
certain Jewish Christians from Jerusalem, a dispute 
arose as to the admission of such Gentiles as had not 
even been proselytes to Judaism, but were brought in 
directly from paganism. To settle this question, the 
brethren at Antioch deputed Paul and Barnabas, with 
several others, to lay the matter before a general meet- 
ing of the apostles and elders in the Jerusalem congre- 
gation, which was the first congregation formed under 
the apostles, and obtain their formal and final decision 
)n a point of so vital importance to the progress of the 
jospel in all heathen lands. On their arrival and pre- 
sentation of the subject, a similar opposition (and of a 
heated character, as we find from the notices in Gal. ii.) 
was made by Christians formerly of the Pharisaic party 



208 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

at the metropolis; so that it was only when, after con- 
siderable dispute, Peter had rehearsed his experience 
with reference to Cornelius, and the signal results of 
the labors of Paul and Barnabas among the Gentiles 
had been recounted, that James, as president of the 
council, pronounced in favor of releasing those received 
into the church from the Gentiles, without requiring 
circumcision or the observance of the Mosaic ceremonial 
law. This conclusion was generally assented to, and 
promulgated in a regular authoritative form, and was 
sent back to Antioch by Paul and Barnabas by letter 
message, to be thence circulated in all the churches in 
pagan countries. By the decision of this council, the 
faithful were commanded to abstain (1) from meats 
which had been offered to idols (so as not even to 
appear to countenance the worship of the heathen), (2) 
from blood and strangled things, and (3) from fornica- 
tion — the prevailing vice of the Gentiles. 

II. COUNCIL OF NICE. 

Two Church councils have been held at Nicsea, but 
only the first of these was properly oecumenical, and it 
is regarded as the most important of such assemblies. 
It was convened by the Emperor Constantine in A. D. 
325. Along with the imperial summoning of the 
council, the different bishops were proffered the service 
of public conveyances for themselves and two presbyters 
and three servants; and when the 318 bishops who had 
complied with the Emperor's request gathered at Nice, 
the Emperor himself opened the council, June 19, in 
his own palace, and its use for future sessions was af- 
forded to this august body of ecclesiastics, as it appears 
from the records that the sessions continuing for two 
months, were held sometimes at the palace, and some- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 209 

times at a Church or some public building. The 
Empire, at the time of the call of the council, contained 
in all about 1800 bishops (1000 for the Greek provinces? 
800 for the Latin), and of these, if 318 attended as re- 
ported by Athanasius (Ad. Apos. c. 2. et al), Socrates 
(Hist. JEccles. bk. viii.) and Theodoret {Hist. Eccles. i- 
7), there were one-sixth of the "episcopal sees" repre- 
sented at Nice — a large number, indeed, if we take into 
consideration the vastness of the imperial realm, and 
fthe difficulty of travel in those times. Including the 
presbyters and deacons and other attendants, the num- 
ber may have amounted in all to between 1500 and 
2000. Most of the Eastern provinces were strongly 
represented. Besides a great number of obscure me- 
diocrities, there were several venerable and distin- 
guished men, as e. g. , Eusebius of Csesarea, who was 
most eminent for learning; the "young archdeacon 
Athanasius," who accompanied the bishop Alexander 
of Alexandria, and who was noted for zeal, intellect 
and eloquence. 

"Some, as confessors, still bore in their bodies 
the marks of Christ from the times of persecution; 
Paphantias of the Upper Thebaid, Potamon of Ilera- 
klea, whose right eye had been put out, and Paul of 
Keo-CaBsarea, who had been tortured with red-hot 
iron under Licinius, and was crippled in both bis hands. 
Others were distinguished for extraordinary ascetic holi- 
ness, and even for miraculous works; like Jacob of 
Nisibis, who spent years as a hermit in forests and 
caves, and lived like a wild beast on roots and leaves, 
and Spyridion (or St. Spiro), of Cyprus, the patron of 
the Ionian Isles, who even after his ordination remained 
a simple shepherd. The Latin Church, on the contrary, 
had only seven delegates : from Spain Hosius or Osius, 
18 



210 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

of Cordova, the ablest and most influential of the West- 
ern representatives; from France, Nicasius of Dijon, 
from North Africa, Csecelian of Carthage; from Pan- 
nonia, Domnus of Strido; from Italy, Eustorgias of 
Milan, and Marcus of Calabria; from Rome, the two 
presbyters Victor, or Vitus, and Vincentius, as delegates 
of the aged Pope Sylvester I. who found it impossible 
to attend in person. A Persian bishop, John, also, and 
a Gothic bishop, Theophilus, the forerunner and teacher 
of the Gothic Bible translator Ulfilas, were present." 
(McCUntock and Strong's Encyc. vol. vii. p. 44.) 

Various theories have been propounded to explain 
Constantine's aim in calling this council. By some it 
is represented as serving a political purpose (based on 
Eusebius Vita. Constant iii. 4); by others it is regarded 
as intended to restore quiet to the Church and unite all 
its parties in the great Trinitarian question on which 
the Church was at that time greatly divided — there ex- 
isting three parties: one, which may be called the ortho- 
dox party, held firmly to the doctrine of the deity of 
Christ; the second was the Arian party, who regarded 
Christ as only a man; and the third, which was in the 
majority, taking conciliatory or middle ground, and 
consenting to the use of such christological expressions 
as all parties could consistently agree upon; they ac- 
knowledged the divine nature of Christ in general bib- 
lical terms, but avoided the use of the term homoousian 
(which means like substance with the Father), which the 
Arians decried as unscriptural, Sabellian, and material- 
istic. According to Pusey, "Constantine did not un- 
derstand the doctrine, and attached as much or more 
importance to uniformity in keeping Easter as to unity 
of faith. Indeed, he himself at this time believed in no 
doctrine but that of Providence, and spared no terms of 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 211 

contempt as to the pettiness of the dispute between 
Alexander and Arius" {Councils of the Church p. 102); 
yet it would seem that Constantine only called a council 
when he believed it impossible to restore peace between 
the contending parties, led respectively by Arius and 
Alexander, and now turned over the case for settlement 
to the bishops, who appeared to him to be the repre- 
sentatives of God and Christ, the organs of the divine 
Spirit "that enlightened and guided the Church," and 
he appears to have hoped that when in council assem- 
bled, analogous to the established custom of deciding 
controversies in the single provinces by assemblies com- 
posed of all the provincial bishops, they would be able 
to dispose of the present controversy. 

No complete collection of the transactions of this 
Nicsean oecumenical council have come down to us. 
Some account of the bishops who composed this assem- 
bly is given by Socrates, Sozomen and Theodoret. It 
is uncertain who presided, but it is generally supposed 
that the president was Hosius, bishop of Cordova in 
Spain. From the reports of two of its attendants, 
Athanasius and Eusebius of Csesarea, we learn that it 
busied itself mainly with the settlement of the different 
christological views. The opening sessions were princi- 
pally devoted, according to these writers, to a con- 
sideration of Arian views, and resulted finally in the 
examination of Arius himself. He did not hesitate to 
maintain that the Son of God was a creature, made 
from nothing; that there was a time when he had no 
existence; that he was capable of his own free will of 
right and wrong. Athanasius, although at the time 
but a deacon, drew the attention of the whole council 
by his marvelous penetration in unraveling and laying 
open the artifices of the heretical views of Arius and his 



212 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUJSm^. 

followers. He resisted Eusebius, Theognis, and Maris, 
the chief supporters of Arius, and evinced such zeal in 
defense of the truth that he attracted both the admira- 
tion of all the anti-Arian party and the bitter hatred of 
the Arian party. We are told that so great and far- 
reaching was the influence of the criticism of Athanasius 
that many of the Arians became doubtful of their own 
standpoint, and eighteen of them abandoned the cause 
of Arius. The orthodox party themselves became en- 
thusiastic in behalf of their cause, and when Eusebius 
of Caesarea proposed a confession of faith — an ancient 
Palestinian confession, which was very similar to the 
Nicene, and acknowledged the divine nature of Christ 
in general biblical terms, but avoided the term in ques- 
tion (homoousios, of the same essence), they rejected it, 
though the emperor had seen and approved this confes : 
sion, and even the Arian minority were ready to accept 
it. They wished a creed which no Arian could honestly 
subscribe, and especially insisted on inserting the ex- 
pression homo-usios, which the Arians so much objected 
to. The fathers finally presented through Hosius of 
Cordova another confession, which became the sub- 
stance of what is now known and owned by the ortho- 
dox churches as the well-known Nicene Creed. Here 
is the Nicene Creed, as translated from the Greek, and 
which was adopted at the council of Nice in 325: 

THE NICENE CREED. 

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker 
of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord 
Jesus Christ, the Son of God begotten of the Father; 
only-begotten, that is of the substance of the Father; 
God of God; Light of Light; very God of very God; 
begotten, not made ; of the same substance with the 
Father; by whom all things were made, both things in 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 213 

heaven and things in earth ; who for us men and our 
salvation descended and became flesh, was made man, 
suffered, and rose again the third day. He ascended 
into heaven; he cometh to judge the quick and dead. 
And in the Holy Spirit. But those who say there was 
a time when he was not; or that he was not before he 
was begotten ; or that he was made from that which 
had no being; or who affirm the Son of God to be of 
any other substance or essence, or created, or variable, 
or mutable, such persons doth the Catholic and Apos- 
tolic Church anathematize. 

This creed was enlarged at the Second Council of Con- 
stantinople, in 381, by which the faith of the Church 
with regard to the person of Christ was set forth in op- 
position to certain errors, notably Arianism. Moreover, 
not only the Semi-Arians, but even many of the Niceni- 
ans (followers of the Nicene Creed), held, with the Ari- 
ans, and especially the Macedonians, that the Holy Spirit 
was created by the Father (Gieseler i. c). After inef- 
fectual attempts, at several synods, to agree upon a 
formula, the Nicene Symbol, with certain additions, was 
adopted in 381, as already stated, at the second oecumen- 
ical Council of Constantinople. The parts added at 
Constantinople are put in brackets. We append it be- 
low as enlarged: 

(1) I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker 
[of heaven and earth], and of all things visible and in- 
visible. (2) And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only- 
begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father [before all 
worlds]; [God of God]; Light of Light; very God of 
very God; begotten, not made; being of one substance 
with the Father, by whom all things were made. (3) 
Who for us men and our salvation came clown from 
heaven, and was incarnate [by the Holy Spirit of the 
Virgin Mary], and was made man [and was crucified, 
also, for us under Pontius Pilate]; he suffered and was 
buried; mid the third day he rose again, according to 



214 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

the Scriptures ; and ascended into heaven [and sitteth 
on the right hand of the Father]. And he shall come 
again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead 
[whose kingdom shall have no end]. And I believe in 
the Holy Spirit [the Lord and Giver of Life], who pro- 
ceedeth from the Father [and the Son], who, with the 
Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified; 
who spake by the prophets. And I believe in one cath- 
olic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism 
for the remission of sins, and I look for the resurrection 
of the dead, and the lite of the world to come. Amen. 
The decision of the council having been laid before 
Constantine, he saw clearly that the Eusebian formula 
would not pass; and as he had at heart, for the sake of 
peace, the most nearly unanimous decision which was 
possible, he gave his voice for the disputed word, and 
declared that he recognized in the unanimous consent 
of the bishops the work of God, and received it with 
reverence, declaring that all those persons should be 
banished who refused to submit to it. Upon this the 
Arians, through fear, also anathematized the dogmas 
condemned, and subscribed the faith laid down by the 
council; that they did so only outwardly was shown by 
their subsequent conduct. It was declared by its advo- 
cates that it was presented after mature deliberation, and 
after diligent consultation of all that the holy evangelists 
and apostles have taught upon the subject; and it pro- 
ceeded to set forth the true doctrine of the Church in a 
creed, in which, in order to defy all the subtleties of the 
Arians (says a modern " orthodox" historian), the coun- 
cil thought good to express by the term "consubstan- 
tial" — homoousios — the divine essence or substance which 
is common to the Father and the Son. According to 
Athanasius, this creed was in a great measure composed 
by Hosius, of Cordova. It was written out by Ilermo- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 215 

genes, bishop of Csesarea, in Cappadocia, and subscribed, 
together with the condemnation of the dogmas and 
expressions of Arius, by all the bishops present with the 
exception of a few of the Arians. Socrates (lib. L, ch. 
5) says that all the bishops except live; Baronius, that 
all except Eusebius, of Nieomedia, and Theognis, of Hl- 
ofiea, assented to the use of the word ofioouatoc, — homoou- 
sios. According to Cave, Secundus, of Ptolemais, and 
Theognis, of Marmorica, alone refused. Arius himself 
was banished, by Constantine's order, to Illyria, where 
he remained until his recall, which took place five years 
after. 

We have now transcribed the chief acts of the TsTicene 
Council ; but that our readers may have, if possible, the 
full benetit of the minor proceedings of "the great and 
holy council," which u holds the highest place among all 
the councils," we proceed to show what other grave mat- 
ters were disposed of by these famous bishops. 

First. They considered the subject of the Meletian 
schism, which for some time past had divided Egypt, 
and they decreed that Meletius should keep the title and 
rank of bishop in his see of Lycopolis, in Egypt, forbid- 
ding him, however, to perform any episcopal functions; 
also, that they whom he had elevated to any ecclesias- 
tical dignities should be admitted to communion, upon 
condition that they should take rank after those who 
were enrolled in any parish (the district under a bishop's 
jurisdiction, which is now called a "diocese," was so 
styled in the Church at that time), and who had been 
ordained by Alexander. Second. They decreed that 
throughout the Church, the festival of Easter should be 
celebrated on the Sunday after the full moon which 
happens next after March 21. Third. They published 
tw T enty canons or rules ; and here they are : 



216 HISTORY OP CHURCH COUNCILS. 

1. Excludes from the exercise of their functions 
those persons in holy orders who have made themselves 
eunuchs. 

2. Forbids to raise neophytes to the priesthood or 
episcopate. 

3. Forbids auy bishop, priest or deacon to have women 
in their houses, except their mothers, sisters, aunts, or 
such women as shall be beyond the reach of slander. 

4. Declares that a bishop ought, if possible, to be con- 
stituted by all the bishops of the province, but allows 
of his consecration by three, at least, with the consent 
of the absent bishops siguilied in writing; the consecra- 
tion to be finally confirmed by the metropolitan. 

5. Orders that they who have been separated from the 
communion of the Church by their own bishop shall not 
be received into communion elsewhere. Also, that a 
provincial synod shall be held twice a year in every 
province to examine into sentences of excommunica- 
tion; one synod to be held before Lent, and the second 
in autumn. 

6. Insists upon the preservation of the rights and 
privileges of the bishops of Alexandria, Antioch, and 
other provinces. 

7. Grants to the bishop of JEW-a (^Elia Capitolina, 
the new city built by ^Elius Hadrian us upon the site of 
Jerusalem, or near it), according to ancient tradition, the 
second place of honor. 

8. Permits those who had been ministers among the 
Cathari, and who returned into the bosom of the Cath- 
olic and Apostolic Church, having received imposition 
of hands, to remain in the ranks of the clergy. Directs, 
however, that they shall, in writing, make profession to 
follow the decrees of the Church; and that they shall 
communicate with those who have married twice, and 
with those who have performed penance for relapsing 
in time of persecution. Directs, further, that in places 
where there is a Catholic bishop and a converted bishop 
of the Cathari (those pretending to peculiar purity of 
life), the former shall retain his rank and office, and the 
latter be considered only as a priest; or the bishop may 
assign him the place of rhorepiscopus. 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 217 

9. Declares to be null and void the ordination of 
priests made without due inquiry, and of those who 
have, before ordination, confessed sins committed. 

10. Declares the same of persons ordained priests 
in ignorance, or whose sin has appeared after ordina- 
tion. 

11. Enacts that those who have fallen away in time 
of persecution without strong temptation shall be three 
years among the hearers, seven years among the pros- 
trators, and for two years shall communicate with the 
people without offering (''communicate with the people 
in prayer, without being admitted to the oblation;" i. e., 
to the holy eucharist, according to Johnson's way of un- 
derstanding it). 

12. Imposes ten years' penance upon any one of the 
military, who, having been deprived of a post on account 
of the taith, shall, after all, give a bribe, and deny the 
faith, in order to receive it back again. 

13. Forbids to deny the holy communion to any one 
likely to die. 

14. Orders that catechumens who have relapsed shall 
be three years among the hearers. 

15. Forbids bishops, priests or deacons to remove from 
one city to another; or any one offending against this 
canon to be compelled to return to his own church, and 
his translation to be void. 

16. Priests or deacons removing from their own church 
not to be received into any other; those who persist, to 
be separated from communion. If any bishop dare to 
ordain a man belonging to another church, the ordina- 
tion to be void. 

17. Directs that all clerks guilty of usury shall be 
deposed. 

18. Forbids deacons to give the eucharist to priests, 
and to receive it themselves before the priests, and to 
sit among the priests; offenders to be deposed. 

19. Directs that Paulianists coming over to the Church 
shall be baptized again. Permits those among their 
clergy who are without reproach, after baptism, to be 
ordained by the Catholic bishops; orders the same thing 
of deaconesses. 

19 



21 tt HISTORY OF (J11URC11 COUNCILS. 

20. Orders that all persons shall offer up their prayers 
ou Sundays and Pentecost, standing. 

It was also proposed to add another canon, enjoining 
continence upon the married clergy; Paphuutius warm- 
ly opposed the imposition of such a yoke, and prevailed, 
so that the proposal fell to the ground. The creed and 
the canons were written in a book, and signed by the 
bishops. The council issued a letter to the Egyptian 
and Libyan bishops as to the decision of the three main 
points; the emperor also sent several edicts to the church- 
es, in which he ascribed the decrees to divine inspi- 
ration, and sent them forth as laws of the realm. On 
July 29, the twentieth anniversary of his accession, the 
emperor gave the members of the council a splendid 
banquet in his palace, which Eusebius (quite too sus- 
ceptible of worldly splendor) describes as a figure of the 
reigm of Christ on earth. Con stan tine remunerated the 
bishops lavishly, and dismissed them with a suitable 
valedictory, and with letters of commendation to the 
authorities of all the provinces on their homeward way. 

COUNCILS OF CONSTANTINOPLE. 

The first oecumenical Council of Constantinople was 
convoked in this eastern city in 381 by Theodosius the 
Great. There were present 150 " orthodox bishops " 
(mostly eastern) and 36 followers of Macedonius, who 
left Constantinople when his doctrine was rejected by 
the majority. The council condemned, besides the 
Macedonians, the Arians, Unomians and Eudoxians, 
and confirmed the resolutions of the Council of Xice. 
It assigned to the bishop of Constantinople the second 
rank in the Church, next to the bishop of Rome, and in 
controversies between the two reserved the decision to 
the emperor. 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 219 

The Second Council of Constantinople. — This coun- 
cil (the fifth in the list of oecumenical councils) was held 
in 553 on account of the Three Chapters' controversy, 
by 165, mostly Oriental bishops. This council excom- 
municated the defenders of the Three Chapters — Theo- 
dore of Mopsuestia, Ibas, and others, and the Roman 
bishop Vigilius, who refused to condemn the Three 
Chapters unconditionally. 

Third Council of Constantinople. — This is the sixth 
in the list of oecumenical councils, and was held from 
680 to 681 in the Trullan palace, and was attended by 
289 bishops, among whom were three Oriental patriarchs, 
and four legates of the Roman bishop Agathon. The 
opinions of the Monothelites were condemned, espe- 
cially through the influence of the Roman legates, as 
heretical. The General Council convoked in 691 by the 
Emperor Justinian II., was also held in the Trullan pal- 
ace. As it was regarded as supplementing the fifth and 
sixth oecumenical councils, which had given no Church 
laws, it was called Quiaisexta (Synodus) or Quinisextum 
(Concilium). It enacted 102 stringent canons on the 
morals of clergymen and ecclesiastical discipline. It is 
recognized as an oecumenical council by the Greeks only. 

Fifth Council of Constantinople. — This assembled in 
754, and was attended by 383 bishops. It passed reso- 
lutions against the veneration of images, which were 
repealed by the second oecumenical council of Nice. It 
is not recognized by the Latin Church, but only by the 
Greek Church. 

Sixth Council of Constantinople. — This was held in 
869, and by the Church of Rome is regarded as the 
fourth oecumenical council of Constantinople, or the 
eighth in the list of oecumenical councils. It deposed 
the patriarch Photius, restored the patriarch Ignatius, 



220 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

and enacted laws on Church discipline. It is, of course, 
not recognized by the Greek or Eastern Church. In 879 
another General Synod was held at Constantinople, at- 
tended by 380 bishops, among whom were the legates 
of Pope John VIII. Photius was recalled, the resolu- 
tions of the preceding council against him repealed, and 
the position of the patriarch of Constantinople to the 
Pope denned. The Greeks number this as the eighth 
oecumenical council. The ninth oecumenical council of 
the Greek Church was held in Constantinople, under 
the Emperor Adronicus the Younger, in 1341. It con- 
demned the opinions of Barlaam as heretical. 

Particular Synods. — The most important of the par- 
ticular synods are: 1 and 2. In 336 and 339, two Arian 
synods, under the leadership of Eusebius, of Nicomedia. 
The former deposed and excommunicated Marcellus, of 
Ancyra; the latter deposed and expelled Bishop Paulus, 
of Constantinople, and appointed Eusebius his successor. 
3. A semi-Arian Synod against ^Etius, who was banish- 
ed. 4. In 426, a synod held against the Messalians; in 
418, 449 and 450, synods against the Eutychians. 5. In 
495 and 496, Eutychian synods, condemning their oppo- 
nents, and recognizing the Henoticon, of Geno. 6. A 
synod, in 516, condemned the resolutions of the council 
of Chalcedon. 7. In 536, against Severus, Anthimus, 
and other chiefs of the Acephali. 8. In 541 (543?) 
against some views of Origen. 9. In 815, two synods 
on the question of veneration of images; the one, at- 
tended by 270 bishops, in favor, and the second against 
the images. 10. In 861, introducing the patriarch Pho- 
tius, and approving the veneration of images. 11. In 
1170 (according to others, 1168), a synod, attended by 
many Eastern and Western bishops, on the reunion of 
the Eastern and Latin churches. Similar synods were 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. _21 



held in 1277, 1280, 1285, all without effect. 12. In 1450, 
a council convoked by the Emperor Constantine Palse- 
ologus deposed the patriarch Gregory, put in his place 
the patriarch Athanasius, and declined to accept the res- 
olutions passed by the council of Florence in favor of 
the union of the Greek and the Latin churches. 13. In 
1638 and 1642, two synods held against the crypto-Cal- 
vinism of the patriarch Cyril Lucaris. 

GENERAL COUNCIL OF EPHESUS. 

The third oecumenical council, convoked by the em- 
peror Theodosius II., was held at Ephesus in 431, upon 
the controversy raised by Nestorius, bishop of Constant- 
inople, who objected to the application of the title of 
Osotoxoz* (theotokos) to the Virgin Mary. Celestine, 
the Pope, not seeing lit to attend in person, sent three 
legates, Arcadius and Projectus, bishops, and Philip, a 
priest. Among the first who arrived at the council was 
Nestorius, with a numerous body of followers, and 
accompanied by Irenseus, a nobleman, his friend and 
protector Cyril of Alexandria also, and Juvenal of 
Jerusalem came, accompanied by about fifty of the 
Egyptian bishops; Memnon of Ephesus had brought 
together about forty of the bishops within his jurisdic- 
tion; and altogether more than two hundred bishops 
were present. Candidianus, the commander of the 
forces of Ephesus attended, by order of the emperor, 
to keep peace and order; but by his conduct he greatly 
favored the partv of Nestorius. The day appointed for 
the opening of the council was June 7th ; but John of 
Antioch, and the other bishops from Sj'ria and the East 
not having arrived, it was delayed till the 22d of the 
same month. At the first session of the council (June 

*The offspring of God. 



222 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

22), before the Greek and Syrian bishops had arrived, 
Cyril and the bishops present condemned the doctrines 
of Nestorius, and deposed and excommunicated him. 
This sentence was signed by 198 bishops, according to 
Tillemont, and by more than 200 according to Fleary; 
it was immediately made known to Nestorius, and pub- 
lished in the public places. At the same time, notice 
of the act was sent to the clergy and to the people of 
Constantinople, with a recommendation to them to 
secure the property of the Church for the successor of 
the deprived Nestorius. As soon, however, as Nestorius 
had received notice of this sentence, he protested against 
it, and all that had passed at the council, and forwarded 
to the Emperor an account of what had been done, set- 
ting forth that Cyril and Memnon, refusing to wait for 
John and the other bishops, had hurried matters on in 
a tumultuous and irregular way. On the 27th of June, 
twenty-seven Syrian bishops arrived, chose John of 
Antioch for their president, and deposed Cyril in their 
turn. In August, Count John, who had been sent by 
Theodosius, arrived at Ephesus, and directed the bishops 
of both synods to meet him on the following day. Ac- 
cordingly, John of Antioch and Nestorius attended 
with their party, and Cyril with the orthodox; but im- 
mediately a dispute arose between them; the latter con- 
tending that Nestorius should not be present, while the 
former wished to exclude Cyril. Upon this, the Count, 
to quiet the dispute, gave both Cyril and Nestorius into 
custody, and then endeavored, but in vain, to reconcile 
the two parties. And thus matters seemed as far from 
settlement as ever. The emperor at last permitted the 
fathers of the council to send to him eight deputies, 
while Orientals or Syrians, on their part, sent as many. 
The place of meeting was at Chalcedon, whither the 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 223 

emperor proceeded, and spent five days in listening to 
the arguments on both sides; and here the Council of 
Ephesus may, in fact, be said to have terminated. 
Nothing is known of what passed at Ohalcedon, but the 
event shows that Theodosius sided with the Catholics, 
since upon his return to Constantinople he ordered, by 
a letter, the Catholic deputies to come there, and to pro- 
ceed to consecrate a bishop in the place of Nestorius, 
whom he had already ordered to leave Ephesus, and to 
confine himself to his monastery near Antioch. After- 
wards he directed that all the bishops at the council, in- 
cluding Cyril and Memnou, should return to their 
respective dioceses. The judgment of this council was 
at once approved by the whole Western Church, and by 
far the greater part of the East, and was subsequently 
confirmed by the (Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon, 
consisting of 630 bishops. Even John of Antioch and 
the Eastern bishops very soon acknowledged it. But 
Nestorius protested to the last that he did not hold the 
heretical opinions anathematized by the council. 

Of the other Councils of Ephesus, the following are 
all that need to be mentioned : 1. In 245 (?) against 
the Patropassian Ncetus; 2. In 400, under Chrysostom, 
where Heraclidus was consecrated bishop of Ephesus, 
and six simoniacal bishops deposed; and the "Robber 
Council," the details of which it is unnecessary to give. 

COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON. 

This (the fourth oecumenical council) was held in 451, 
and was convoked by the emperor Marcianus, at the re- 
quest of the bishops (especially of Leo I.) to put down 
the Eutychian and Nestorian heresies. The emperor 
had first summoned the bishops to meet at Nicsea, but 
when the time approached he was prevented by political 



224 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

troubles from going so far from the imperial city, and 
therefore changed the place of meeting to Chalcedon, 
in Bithynia, on the Bosphorus, opposite Constantinople. 
The council was attended by 630 bishops and deputies, 
all Eastern except four legates sent by Leo I. from 
Rome. The sessions began October 8, 451, and ended 
October 21. As the two parties in the council were 
roused to the highest pitch of passion, the proceedings, 
especially during the early sessions, were very tumult- 
uous, until the lay commissioners and senators had to 
urge the bishops to keep order, saying that such 
exfioyoztt: dy/jLorexou (vulgar outcries) were disgraceful. 
(Mansi, as quoted by Stanley, Eastern Church lect. ii p. 
165.) 

At the first session (October 8, 451) the council assem- 
bled in the church of St. Euphemia; in the center sat 
the officers of the emperor; at their left, or on the epis- 
tle side, sat the bishops of Constantinople, Antioch, 
Caesarea in Cappadocia, and of the other Eastern dio- 
ceses, and Pontus, Asia and Thrace, together with the 
four legates; on the other side were Dioscurus, Juvenal, 
Thalassius of Csesarea, and the other bishops of Egypt, 
Palestine and Illyria, most of whom had been present 
in the pseudo-council of Ephesus. In the midst were 
the holy gospels, placed upon a raised seat. When they 
had taken their seats, the legates of the Pope demanded 
that Dioscurus should withdraw from the assembly, ac- 
cusing him of his scandalous conduct at Ephesus, and 
declaring that otherwise they would depart. Then the 
imperial officers ordered him to withdraw from the coun- 
cil, and to take his seat among the accused. The acts 
of the so-called "Bobber Council" of Ephesus were dis- 
cussed and condemned, and Dioscurus was left with only 
twelve bishops to stand by him. The Eutychian heresy, 



REFORMATORY- MOVEMENTS. 225 

that in our Lord were two natures before his incarna- 
tion, and but one afterwards, was anathematized. The 
majority of the assembled bishops then proceeded to 
anathematize Dioseurus himself, and demanded that he, 
together with Juvenal of Jerusalem, Thalassius ot Cses- 
area, Eusebius of Ancyra, Eustachius of Berytus, and 
Basil of Seleucia, who had presided at the council, should 
be deposed from the episcopate. 

At the second session (October 10) the following expo- 
sition of faith, substantially taken from a letter of Leo 
to Flavianus, was approved, and its opponents anathe- 
matized : "The divine nature and the human nature, 
each remaining perfect, have been united in one person, 
to the intent that the same Mediator might die, being 
yet immortal and impossible. . . . Neither nature 
is altered by the other; he who is truly God is also truly 
man. . . . The Word and the flesh preserve each 
its proper functions. Holy Scripture proves equally the 
verity of the two natures. He is God, since it is writ- 
ten, 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word 
was God.' He is also man, since it is written, 'The 
Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.' As man, 
he was tempted by the devil; as God, he is ministered 
unto by. angels. As man, he wept over the tomb of 
Lazarus; as God, he raised him from the dead. As 
man, he is nailed to the cross; as God, he makes all 
nature tremble at his death. It is by reason of the un- 
ity of the person that we say that the Son of man came 
down from heaven, and that the Son of God was cruci- 
fied and buried, although he was so only as to his human 
nature." 

At the third session the deposition of Dioseurus was 
pronounced irrevocable, and, soon after, he was banished 



226 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

to Gangra, in Paphlagonia, where, in the course of three 
years, he died. 

In the Jifth session, the following formula of faith, on 
the question at issue, was adopted: "We confess, and 
with one accord teach, one and the same Son, our Lord 
Jesus Christ, perfect in the divinity, perfect in the hu- 
manity, truly God and truly man, consisting of a rea- 
sonable soul and body; consubstantial with the Father 
according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us 
according to the manhood; in all things like unto us, 
sin only excepted; who was begotten of the Father be- 
fore all ages, according to the Godhead; and in the last 
days, the same was born according to the manhood, of 
Mary the Virgin, mother of God, for us and for our 
salvation; who is to be acknowledged one and the same 
Christ, the Son, the Lord, the only begotten in two na- 
tures, without mixture, change, division or separation; 
the difference of natures not being removed by their 
union, but rather the propriety of each nature being 
preserved, and concurring in one person and in one 
uTtoaraott;, so that he is not divided or separated into 
two persons, but the only Son, God, the Word, our Lord 
Jesus Christ, and one and the same person." At the 
later sessions (ix.-xv.), a number of questions of order, 
supremacy, discipline, etc., were settled. But, by far, 
the most important was the twenty-eighth canon, session 
xv., by which the patriarch of Constantinople was placed 
on equality of authority with the bishop of Rome, sav- 
ing only to the latter priority of honor. The Roman 
delegates protested against this, and, after its adoption, 
Leo constantly opposed it, upon the plea that it contra- 
dicted the sixth of Nicsea, which assigned the second 
place in dignity to Alexandria; however, in spite ol his 
opposition and that of his successors, the canon remain- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 227 

ed and was executed. The acts of this council in Greek, 
with the exception of the anathemas, are lost. 

THE SECOND COUNCIL OF NICE. 

This is called the seventh oecumenical council, though 
falsely so, as some assert. It assembled August 17, 786, 
by order of the Empress Irene and her son Constantine. 
Owing to the tumults raised by the Iconoclastic party, 
it was dissolved and reconvened on September 24, 787. 
(Theophanes, who was present, says that the opening of 
the council was made on October 11.) There were pres- 
ent 375 bishops from Greece, Thrace, Natolia, the Isles 
of the Archipelago, Sicily and Italy. Pope Hadrian 
and all the Oriental patriarchs sent legates to represent 
them in the synod, those of Rome taking the first place; 
two commissioners from the emperor and empress also 
assisted at it. The causes which led to the assembling 
of this council were briefly as follows: The Emperor 
Leo (and afterwards his son Constantine Oopronymus), 
offended at the excess of veneration often offered to the 
images of Christ and the saints, made a decree against 
the use of images in any way, and caused them every- 
where to be removed and destroyed. These severe and 
summary proceedings raised an opposition almost as vio- 
lent, and both the patriarch of Constantinople , Ger- 
manus) and the Pope (Hadrian) defended the use of 
images, declaring them to have been always in use in 
the churches, and showing, or attempting to show, the 
difference between absolute and relative worship. How- 
ever, in a council assembled at Constantinople in 754, 
composed of 338 bishops, a decree was published against 
the use of images. But at this time Constantine Co- 
pronymus died, and Tarasius, patriarch of Constanti- 
nople, induced the Empress Irene and her son Constan- 



228 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

tine to convoke this council, in which the decrees of the 
council of 754 at Constantinople were set aside. 

The first session was held in the church of St. Sophia. 
Tarasius, the, patriarch, spoke first, and exhorted the 
bishops to reject all novelties, and to cling to the tradi- 
tions of the Church. After this, ten bishops were brought 
before the council, accused of following the party of the 
Iconoclasts (image breakers) — three of whom, Basil of 
Ancyra, Theodore of Myra, and Theodosius of Aruor- 
ium, recanted, and declared that they received with all 
honor the relics and sacred images of Jesus Christ, the 
blessed Virgin, and the saints; upon which they were 
permitted to take their seats; the others were remand- 
ed to the next session. The forty-second of the apos- 
tolic canons, and the eighth of the Nicsea, and other 
canons relating to the reception of converted heretics, 
w r ere read. 

In the second session, the letters of Pope Hadrian to 
the empress and to the patriarch Tarasius were read. 
The latter then declared his entire concurrence in the 
view taken of the question by the bishop of Rome, viz: 
that images are to be adored with a" relative worship," 
reserving to God alone faith and the worship of Latria. 
This opinion was warmly applauded by the whole coun- 
cil. 

In the third session, the confession of Gregory of Neo- 
Csesarea, the leader of the Iconoclast party, was received, 
and declared by the council to be satisfactory; where- 
upon he was, after some discussion, admitted to take his 
seat, and with him the bishops mentioned above. Then 
the letters of Tarasius to the patriarchs of Alexandria, 
Antioch and Jerusalem, and their replies, as well as the 
confession of Theodore of Jerusalem, were read and ap- 
proved. The passages of Holy Scripture relating to the 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 229 

cherubim which overshadowed the ark of the covenant, 
and which ornamented the interior of the temple, were 
read, together with other passages taken from, the fa- 
thers, showing that God had, in other days, worked mir- 
acles by means of images. 

In the fifth session, the patriarch Tarasius endeavored 
to show that the innovators, in their attempts to destroy 
all images, were following in the steps of the Jews, pa- 
gans, Manichseans, and other heretics. The council then 
came to the conclusion that the images should be re- 
stored to their usual places, and be carried in processions 
as before. 

In the sixth session, the refutation of the definition 
of faith, made in the council of Iconoclasts at Constan- 
tinople, was read. They had there declared that the 
eucharist was the only image allowed of our Lord Jesus 
Christ; but the fathers of the present synod, in their 
refutation, maintained that the eucharist is nowhere 
spoken of as the image of our Lord's body, but as the 
very body itself. After this, the fathers replied to the 
passages from Holy Scripture and from the fathers 
which the Iconoclasts had adduced in support of their 
views, and, in doing so, insisted chiefly upon perpetual 
tradition and the infallibility of the Church. 

In the seventh session a definition of faith was read, 
which was to this effect: i% We decide that the holy im- 
ages, whether painted or graven, or of whatever kind 
they may be, ought to be exposed to view — whether in 
churches, upon sacred vessels and vestments, upon walls, 
or in private houses, or by the wayside; since the oftener 
Jesus Christ, his blessed mother, and the saints are seen 
in their images, the more will man be le<l to think of 
the originals, and to love them. Salutation and the 
adoration of honor ought to be paid to images, but not 



230 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

the worship of Latvia (adoration due to God alone), 
which belongs to God alone; nevertheless, it is lawful 
to burn lights before them, and to incense them, as is 
usually done with the cross, the books of the gospels, 
and other sacred things, according to the pious use of 
the ancients ; for honor so paid to the images is trans- 
mitted to the original, which it represents. Such is the 
doctrine of the holy fathers and the tradition of the 
Catholic Church; and we order that they who dare to 
think or teach otherwise, if bishops or other clerks, shall 
be deposed; if monks or laymen, shall be excommuni- 
cated." This decree was signed by the legates and all 
the bishops. 

Another session (not recognized either by Greeks or 
Latins) was held at Constantinople, to which place the 
bishops had been cited by the Empress Irene, who was 
present, with her son Constantine, and addressed the 
assembly. The decree of the council and the passages 
from the fathers read at Nicsea were repeated, and the 
former was again subscribed. The council of Constan- 
tinople against image- worship was anathematized, and 
the memory of German us of Constantinople, John of 
Damascus, and George of Cyprus, held up to veneration. 
Twenty-two canons of discipline were published. 

1. Insists upon the proper observation of the canons 
of the Church. 

2. Forbids to consecrate those who do not know the 
psalter, and will not promise to observe the canons. 

3. Forbids princes to elect bishops. 

7. Forbids to consecrate any church or altar in which 
relics are not contained. 

14. Forbids those who are not ordained to read in the 
synaxis from the Ambon. 

15 and 16. Forbid plurality of beneficences, and lux- 
ury in dress among the clergy. 

20. Forbids double monasteries, for men and women. 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 231 

This council was not for a long period recognized in 
France. The grounds upon which the French bishops 
opposed it are contained in the celebrated Caroline 
Books, written by order of Charlemagne. Their chief 
objections were these: 1. That no Western bishops, 
except the Pope, by his legates, were present; 2. That 
the decision was contrary to their custom, which was to 
use images, but not in any way to worship them; 3. That 
the council w T as not assembled from all parts of the 
Church, nor was its decision in accordance with that of 
the Catholic Church. The Caroline Books were answered 
by Pope Adrian, but w T ith little effect, so far as the 
Gallican Church was concerned, which continued long 
after this to reject this council in toto. . 

LATERAN COUNCILS. 

Lateran Councils is a general name applied to the 
ecclesiastical councils that have been convened in the 
Lateran Church at Rome, but especially to the five great 
councils held there, and regarded by the Roman Cath- 
olics as oecumenical, viz : those which were held in the 
years 1123, 1139, 1179, 1215 and 1512-17. We have 
only room to notice the most important of all these 
councils, and that with reference to their principal en- 
actments and historical connections. 

I. The council of 649, under Martin I., condemned 
the Monothelitic doctrine, or that of one will in the 
person of Christ. This view was developed as a contin- 
uation of the Monophysite controversy. The council 
of Chalcedon, in 451, had affirmed the existence of two 
natures in Christ in one person, against the Antiochians, 
the Nestorians and Eutychians. This determination 
of the council did not obtain final supremacy in the 
Greek and Latin Churches till after the time of Justin- 



232 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

ian, and the conflict with it was continued under various 
forms. From the council of Chalcedon till that of Frank- 
fort, in 793, the Church councils, especially, sought to 
maintain the twofoldness of the nature of Christ asserted 
at Chalcedon, with less regard to the unity, which was 
at the same time established. An early source for the 
rise of Monothelitism appeared in the writings of Pseudo- 
Dionysius the Areopagite, which, originating in the 
fourth century, probably obtained for many centuries 
thereafter great credit in the Church. A N"eo-Platonic 
mysticism in these writings seeks to mediate between 
the prevalent Church doctrine and Monophysitism (or 
the doctrine of one nature in Christ). "The Areopagite 
is not an outspoken Monophysite, and yet with him the 
human in Christ is only a form of the divine, and there 
is in all the acts of Christ but one mode of operation, the 
theandric energy" (rnia theandrikee henergeia). This ex- 
pression became a favorite one with all the Monophysite 
opponents of the Chalcedonian decisions. 

The Monothelitic controversy proper extends from 
623 to 680, at which latter date the synod of Constan- 
tinople gave the most precise definition of two wills in 
the nature of Christ. "The earlier stage of the contro- 
versy, extending to the year 638, concerns rather the 
question of one or two energies or modes of working in 
the acts of Christ." The Emperor Heraclius, on the 
occasion of his reconquering the Eastern provinces from 
the Persians in the year 622, and there coming in con- 
tact with certain Monophysite bishops, conceived the idea 
of reconciling them to the Church, by authorizing the 
expression in reference to the acts of Christ which was 
used by Dionysius. Sergius, patriarch of Constantino- 
ple, being consulted, admitted the propriety of the ex- 
pivs-inn as one sanctioned by the fathers, and recom' 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 233 

mended it to Cyrus, bishop of Phasis, who, being made 
soon after bishop of Alexandria, set up a compromise 
for the Mouophysites with the council of Chaicedon on 
nine points. Sophronius, a monk of Alexandria, seri- 
ously objected to the course taken by Sergius, and, on 
being made bishop of Jerusalem, became so strong an 
opponent that Sergius called to his aid the influence of 
Honorius, bishop of Rome, who expressed himself in 
favor of the view, "rather one will than of one opera 
tion," but advised that controversy be avoided. "It is 
unquestionably the fact that the expressed views of 
Honorius, though a Pope, were subsequently condemn- 
ed in council." By occasion of the more decided op- 
position of Sophronius, the Emperor Ileraclius, under 
advice of Sergius, issued his edict, the Ecthesis, in 638, 
in which he forbade the use of either expression, "one 
mode of working," or "two modes of working," in a 
controversial way; but especially prohibited the latter, 
since it is evident that Christ can have but one will, the 
human being subordinate to the divine. This was dis- 
tinct Monothelitism. :i A powerful opponent of this view 
was the monk Maximus, whose writings had a control- 
ling influence with the Lateran Council. "He asserts 
that for the work of redemption a completeness in the 
two natures of Christ is necessary; there must be a 
complete human will. The Logos, indeed, works all 
through the human working and willing. There is a 
theandric energy in his own sense. It is rather as a 
tropos antidoseos, or what was subsequently called the 
communicatio idiomatum. " 

Maximus worked with great zeal against Monothe- 
litism in Rome and in Africa, sending out thence tracts 
on the subject into the Eastern countries. Sophronius 
still carried on the controversy, as also, with him, 
20 



234 HISTORY OF CHURCH councils. 

Stephen, bishop of Doria, his pupil. After the death 
of Honorius, in 638, the bishops of Home were decidedly 
opposed to Monothelitism, and Martin I., who had zeal- 
ously contended against the view while representative 
of the Roman Church at Constantinople, became, when 
made Pope in 649, the chief pillar of the contrary opin- 
ion. Advocates of the view enunciated in the Ecthesis 
of Heraclius were Theodore, bishop of Phasan, and 
Pyrrhus, of Constantinople. In 648, the Emperor Con- 
stans II., under the influence of the patriarch Paul, is- 
sued his Type (tutto^ ruareo^), which, though not so de- 
cidedly Monothelitic as the Ecthesis, condemns, under 
threat of the severest penalties, any further controversy 
upon the subject. Without consulting the emperor, 
Martin I. now convoked this first Lateran Council, in 
which he presided over about 104 bishops from Italy, 
Sicily, Sardinia and Africa. The Pope sought to ob- 
tain generally recognition for the council, and it was 
finally everywhere received with the five oecumenical 
councils. Five sessions were held; the writings of the 
prominent Monothelites were examined and condemned; 
Pope Martin explained the proper meaning of Diony- 
sius' term "theandric operation," stating that it was 
designed to signify two operations of one person ; the 
Ecthesis of Heraclius and Type of Constans were con- 
demned; and the judgment of the council pronounced 
in twenty canons, which " anathematize all who do not 
confess in our Lord Jesus Christ two wills and two 
operations." 

II. The councils of 1105, 1112 and 1116, under Pascal 
II., concern the contest about investitures between the 
Pope and the emperor, which was brought to a close in 
the council of 1123, called and presided over by Calix- 
tus II. This body consisted of 300 bishops and 600 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 235 

abbots, all of the Latin Church. The investiture con- 
test, which began as early as 1054, when, by mutual de- 
crees of excommunication, the breach between the east- 
ern and western churches was made final, arose from 
the claim made by the German emperors to an inherit- 
ance of rights, exercised by the Greek emperors, con- 
cerning the appointment of candidates to ecclesiastical 
offices, and their investiture with the right to hold 
church property as subjects of the empire. Under the 
new German empire, from Otho the Great to Henry IV., 
936-1056, the popes themselves were confirmed in their 
seats by the emperor. Henry III. obtained from the 
Council of Sutry, w T hich was held near Rome, in the 
midst of his own army, in 1046, the power of nominat- 
ing the popes, without intervention of clergy or people. 
The influence of Hildebrand was now felt — an influence 
which he had begun to exert from the time of Leo IX., 
in 1048, and which secured from Nicolas II. (1063) a de- 
cree transferring the election of popes to a conclave of 
cardinals. Hildebrand, as Gregory VII. , maintained a 
celebrated contest with Henry IV., to whom, in 1075, he 
forbade all power of investiture, excommunicating the 
emperor the next year, and causing him to do penance 
at Canossa. With his victorious campaign in Italy 
(1080-83) Henry drove the Pope into exile at Salerno, 
where he soon after died. 

His immediate successors, however, were such as he 
had designated for the post, and were the inheritors of 
his doctrines and plans for the supremacy of the church. 
Urban II. sent forth an encyclical, declaring his adhe- 
sion to the principles of Gregory — the Dictatus Gregorii; 
and Pascal II. (1099-1118), who had been one of Greg- 
ory's cardinals, showed more zeal than firmness in the 
same course. In the Lateran Council under the Pope 



236 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

(1105), an oath of obedience to the Pope was taken by 
the clergy, and a promise rendered to affirm whatever 
he and the church in council should affirm. The Count 
De Meulan and his confederates were excommunicated 
for having encouraged the King of England in his con- 
duct concerning investitures. Henry V. , who, in the 
rebellion against his father, was encouraged by Pascal, 
would nevertheless yield nothing on becoming emperor 
(1105), in the matter of investitures; his example being 
followed in this respect by France and England. Henry 
marched into Italy and imprisoned the Pope in the year 
1111, forcing from him the concession of rendering back 
to the emperor the tiefs of the bishops, on condition 
that there should be no imperial interference with the 
elections. For his weakness in this and in other points, 
the Pope was bitterly reproached, and the council of 
1112 revoked all these concessions and excommunicated 
the emperor. Notwithstanding the rebellion of his 
German subjects, Henry collected an army and invaded. 
Italy anew in 1116. The council convoked the same 
year, thereupon renewed the revocation of the conces- 
sions which Pascal had formerly made, and anathema- 
tized the emperor. At last, the German people, weary 
of the conflict between Church and State, brought a 
peaceful compromise in the concordat at the imperial 
diet of Worms, in 1122. The principles of this con- 
cordat were adopted by the council of 1123. The terms 
of the compact are as follows: 

"The emperor surrenders to God, to St. Peter and 
Paul, and to the Catholic Church, all right of investi- 
ture by king and. staff. He grants that elections and 
ordinances in all churches shall take place freely in ac- 
cordance with ecclesiastical laws. The Pope agrees that 
the election of German prelates shall be had in the pres- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 287 

ence of the emperor, provided it is without violence or 
simony. In case any election is disputed, the emperor 
shall render assistance to the legal party, with the ad- 
vice of the archbishop and the bishops. The person 
elected is invested with the imperial lief by the royal 
scepter pledged for the execution of everything required 
by law. Whoever is consecrated shall also receive in 
like manner bis investiture from other parts of the 
empire within six months." (Hase, Church History, p. 
200; G-ieseler, Eccles. Hist., iii., 181 sq.) The Pope bere 
made considerable concessions in form, but actually, 
through his influence, obtained all power at the elec- 
tions. The council of 1123 also renewed the £rant of 
indulgences promulgated by Urban II. in promotion of 
the first crusade in 1095, and decreed the celibacy of the 
clergy. Twenty-two canons of discipline were enacted. 
III. The council of 1139, under Innocent II., con- 
demned the anti-pope Anacletus II., with his adher- 
ents, and deposed all who had received office under 
him. On the same day with the installation of Inno- 
cent II., in 1130, Peter of Leon, a cardinal, and grand- 
son of a rich Jewish banker, had been proclaimed Pope 
as Anacletus II., by a majority of the cardinals. Inno- 
cent took refuge in France, where he was supported by 
the king. His cause was very warmly espoused by 
Bernard of Clairvaux, through whose influence chiefly 
Innocent recovered his position in Italy, and marched 
into Rome triumphantly with Lothaire II., in 1136. 
Anacletus died in 1138,. and a successor was chosen by 
his party only with the purpose of making peace. Roger 
of Sicily had supported Anacletus, and was on this ac- 
count condemned in the council of 1139, though the 
origin of the kingdom of the Two Sicilies belongs to 
the same year, Roger having taken Innocent prisoner, 



238 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

and having compelled the Pope to bestow upon him the 
investiture of this kingdom. At this council Arnold of 
Brescia was also condemned. This was a young clergy- 
man of the city of Brescia, a disciple of Abelard, who, 
inspired by the free philosophical spirit of his master, 
devoted himself to the promotion of practical reform in 
Church and State. A marked spirit of political inde- 
pendence was manifesting itself about this time in Lom- 
bardy, as an inheritance from the old Roman municipal- 
ities established there. The popes, from the days of Leo 
IX., had themselves inspired movements of ecclesiastical 
reform. Pascal IT. had admitted that the secular power 
of the bishops interfered with their spiritual duties. 
Bernard, though a zealous opponent of Arnold, yet 
writes as follows in his Contemplations on the Papacy: 
"Who can mention the place where one of the apostles 
ever held a trial, decided disputes about boundaries, or 
portioned out lands?" "I read that the apostles stood 
before judgment seats, not sat on them." 

Arnold preached with great zeal against the political 
power and wealth of the clergy. "The church ought 
rather to rejoice," he said, "in an apostolic poverty." 
He was driven successively from Italy, France and 
Switzerland, but in 1139 was recalled to Pome by the 
populace, who sought to revive the sovereignty, the 
State, established a Senate, limited the Pope to the ex- 
ercise of spiritual power, and the possession of volun- 
tary offerings, and invited the German emperor to make 
Pome his capital. Arnold and his "politicians" at 
Rome thus gave Pope Innocent and his immediate suc- 
cessors — Lucius II., Eugenius III., and Adrian IV. — 
more trouble than any political movements elsewhere. 
This condemnation at the council did not effectually di- 
minish his power. When, however, Adrian, in 1154, 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 239 

put the city of Rome under ban, and prohibited all pub- 
lie worship, Arnold was abandoned by the Senate, sac- 
rificed by Frederick I., and hung at Home in 1155, his 
body being burned and thrown into the river Tiber. 
Among the canons of the council, the twenty-third con- 
demns the heresy of the Manichseans, as the followers 
of Peter de Brins were called. This heresy was at- 
tributed to the early Waldensians in France and else- 
where, arising partly from their ascetic mode of life. 
About 1,000 prelates were present at this council; thirty 
canons of discipline were published, and among them 
reaffirmations of former canons against simony, and 
concubinage in the clergy. 

IV. The council of 1179, under Alexander III., num- 
bering 280, mostly Latin bishops, was called to correct 
certain abuses which had arisen during the long schism 
ju«t brought to a close by the peace of Venice, 1177. 
Until near the end of the twelfth century the popes 
were hard pressed by Hohenstauffen emperors. It is 
the contest of Grhibelline and Guelph. Frederick I. had 
taken umbrage at the use of the term "beneficium," in 
a letter addressed to him by Adrian IV., about the rude- 
ness of German knights to pilgrims visiting Rome, as if 
the Pope meant to imply that the imperial authority 
had been conferred by him. The emperor marched into 
Italy, and other letters were interchanged between him 
and the Pope, w T hen, upon the death of Adrian, in 1159, 
the two parties — the hierarchic and the moderate among 
the cardinals — chose two opposing popes, viz.: Alexan- 
der III. and Victor IV. The Emperor's Council, called 
at Pavia in 1160, recognized the latter. Pascal III. and 
Calixtus III. followed at the imperial dictation, with but 
little influence. Alexander, from his refuge in France, 
enjoyed great popularity. He had on his side the Loin- 



240 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

bard League. The cause of Frederick was defended by 
the lawyers of Bologna, who ascribed to him unlimited 
power, to the prejudice of the people. Defeated at 
Legnano, in 1176, the emperor subscribed, at the dicta- 
tion of Alexander, the peace of Venice, the provisions 
of which were based on the concordat of Worms. The 
first and most important of the twenty-seven canons es 
tablished by this council, which were mostly disciplin- 
ary, provides that henceforth " the election of the popes 
shall be confined to the college of cardinals, and two- 
thirds of the votes shall be required to make a lawful 
election, instead of a majority only, as heretofore. It 
was by this council also that the "errors and impieties" 
of the Waldenses and Albigenses were declared heret- 
ical. At the unimportant council of 1167 Pope Alex- 
ander excommunicated Frederick I. 

V. The council of 1215, under Innocent III., was the 
most important of all the Lateran Councils. It is usu- 
ally styled the Fourth Lateran. It continued in session 
from November 11 to Novembor 30, there being present 
71 archbishops, 412 bishops, 800 abbots, the patriarchs 
of Constantinople and Jerusalem, and the legates of 
other patriarchs and crowned heads. The Pope opened 
the convocation with a sermon on Luke xxii. 15, relat- 
ing to the recovery of the Holy Land and the reforma- 
tion of the church. The remarkable power of Innocent 
III. is displayed in his influence over this council, which 
was submissive to all his wishes, and received the sev- 
enty canons proposed by him. The papal prerogatives 
attained their greatest supremacy in Innocent, whose 
pontificate extended from 1198 to 1216. The bull, Unam 
Sanctam, of Boniface VIII., directed against Philip the 
Fair in 1302, marks the limit from which the power of 
the popes evidently began to decline. Innocent ITL, a 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 241 

man of great personal influence, of marked ability as a 
writer and orator, bold, crafty, and ever watchful of the 
affairs of Church and State, had his eye on all that 
transpired through his legates. The chief objects which 
his pontificate sought were, first, "the strengthening of 
the States of the Church; second, separation of the two 
Sicilies from all dependence on the German empire; 
third, the liberation of Italy from all foreign control, 
fourth, the exercise of guardianship over the confeder- 
acy of its States; fifth, the liberation of the Oriental 
Church; sixth, the extermination of heretics, and, sev- 
enth, the exercise of ecclesiastical discipline." (Hase, 
Church Hist., p. 207.) 

Hitherto England, Germany and France had consti- 
tuted a balance of power against the Pope, but under 
Innocent the two former, as well as Italy, submitted to 
the claims of the pseudo-Isodorean decretals. France 
was early laid under interdict (1200), on account of 
Philip Agustus' repudiation of Ingeburge and the French 
bishop's approval of the act, while John of England was 
deprived of his realm, to receive it back (in 1213) only 
as a fief of Rome. Deciding at first for Otto IV., the 
Guelph, against the Hohenstauffen Philip, in Germany, 
Innocent subsequently secured from the council the rec- 
ognition of Frederick II., vainly seeking in this his 
German policy to free Italy entirely from the power of 
the emperor. The famous seventy constitutions of In- 
nocent, if not discussed in a conciliatory manner, by the 
bishops, or passed with every form of enactment, were 
nevertheless regarded as the canons of the council, so 
recognized by the Council of Trent, and by church au- 
thorities of the intervening age, and they have consti- 
tuted a fundamental law for many well-known practices 
of the church. The first of these canons asserts the 
21 



242 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

Catholic faith in the unity of God against the Manicluean 
sects. It also, for the first time, makes the doctrine of 
substantiation, in the use of this express term, an article 
of faith. "The body and blood of Jesus Christ in the 
sacrament of the altar are truly contained under the 
species of bread and wine, the bread being, by the di- 
vine omnipotence, transubstantiated into his body, and 
the wine into his blood." The second canon condemns 
the treatise of Joachim, the prophet of Calabria, which 
he wrote against Peter Lombard on the subject of the 
Trinity. 

The third canon is of great importance, furnishing the 
basis for the crusade against the Albigenses, and for all 
severities of a like character on the part of the Romish 
Church. It " anathematizes all heretics who hold any- 
thing in opposition to the preceding exposition of faith, 
and enjoins that, after condemnation, they shall be de- 
livered over to the secular arm; also excommunicates 
all who receive, protect or maintain heretics, and threat- 
ens with deposition all bishops who do not use their ut- 
most endeavors to clear their diocese of them." (Landon, 
Manual of Councils, p. 295.) 

The fourth canon invites the Greeks to unite with and 
submit themselves to the Romish Church. The fifth canon 
regulates the order of precedence of the patriarchs: 1. 
Rome; 2. Constantinople; 3. Alexandria; 4. Antioch; 
5. Jerusalem; and permits these several patriarchs to 
give the pall to the archbishops of their dependencies, 
exacting from themselves a profession of faith and of 
obedience to the Roman see, when they receive the pall 
from the Pope. The sixth to the twentieth, inclusive, are 
of minor importance to the Christian world. (Landon, 
p. 296). The twenty-first canon enjoins "all the faithful 
of both sexes, having arrived at years of discretion, tc 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 243 

confess all their sins at least once a year to their proper 
priest, and to communicate at Easter." This is the first 
canon known which orders sacramental confession gen- 
erally, and may have heen occasioned by the teaching of 
the Waldenses, that neither confession nor satisfaction 
was necessary in order to obtain remission of sin. From 
the words with which it begins it is known as the canon 
"Omnis utriusque sexus," and was solemnly reaffirmed by 
the Council of Trent. The canons (given completely 
by Landon, Manual of Councils, p. 293, sq.) in general 
constitute a body of full and severe disciplinary enact- 
ments. This council reaffirmed and extended the "Truce 
of God" on plenary indulgence which had been previ- 
ously proclaimed in behalf of the eastern crusades, and 
fixed the time, June 1, and the place Sicily, as a rendez- 
vous for another crusade. 

This council confirmed Simon cle Montfort in posses- 
sion of lands which the crusaders had obtained by papal 
confiscation from the Waldenses, and decreed the entire 
extirpation of the heresy. The Waldenses or Albigenses 
in the south of France were the followers of PeterWaldo, 
a wealthy citizen of Lyons, who, from religious princi- 
ple, adopted a life of poverty. His adherents were also 
called Leouistse and "poor men of Lyons." They were 
allied in their sentiments to the Yaudois of the Pied- 
montese valleys, with whom they became u lited for 
mutual defense. They protested against these points in 
the doctrine of the Romish Church: First, transubstan- 
tiation ; second, the sacraments of confirmation, confes- 
sion and marriage; third, the invocation of saints; fourth, 
the worship of images; fifth, the temporal power of the 
clergy. A crusade had been instituted against them by 
the papal power in 1178. Innocent sought to win them 
over and make monks of them by establishing, in 1201, 



244 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

the order of "Poor Catholics." Unsuccessful in this, he 
confiscated their lands to the feudal lords, and estab- 
lished an inquisition among them under the direction of 
Dominic, which was formally sanctioned by the council 
under consideration. The warfare against them, incited 
and directed by the monks of Citeaux, was allowed by 
Philip Augustus. Count Raymond, of Toulouse, es- 
poused the cause of his persecuted vassals. The papal 
legate, Peter of Castelman, sent to convert the Walden- 
ses, was murdered by Raymond, whose dominions were 
thereupon assaulted, in 1209, by a fiercer crusade of so-- 
called u Christian Pilgrims," led on by Simbn de Mont- 
fort and Arnold, the Abbot of Citeaux. The Count of 
Toulouse submitted, but a bloody warfare' was prosecuted 
against Raymond Roger, viscount of Beziers and Albi, 
and subsequently 200 towns and castles, within the boun- 
daries of the two counts, were granted to the successful 
Simon de Montfort. A rebellion, however, against his 
power deprived him of all; but Raymond of Toulouse, 
who appeared at the council of 1215, obtained no favor, 
and his territory was declared to be alienated from him 
forever. 

VI. The Lateran Council of 1512-1517, under Julius 
II. and Leo X., was convened for the " reformation of 
abuses," for the condemnation of the Council of Pisa, 
"and attained its most important result in the abolition 
of the Pragmatic Sanction." France, under Louis XII., 
had obtained great military successes in Italy by the 
League of Cambray, formed in 1509 against Venice. In 
the interests of France, and by the friendship of some 
of the cardinals, Louis XII. summoned a Church Coun- 
cil at Pisa, November, 1511, which in 1512 was moved 
to Milan, but was entirely fruitless of results, being dis- 
solved by the presence of the Pope's army. Julius I . a 



REFORMATORY MOVEMEVib. 245 

though at first jealous of Venice, had nevertheless, 
aroused by the successes of the French general, formed 
the Holy Alliance with Venice, Spain, England and 
Switzerland, and now, at the head of his army, drove 
the French beyond the Alps and himself summoned a 
council at the Lateran, May 10, 1512. This council ex- 
tended over twelve sessions, until March, 1517. The 
Bishop of Guerk had actively promoted the summon' 1 ng 
of the council, and attended as representative of the 
German emperor. All the acts of the Council of Pisa 
were at Once annulled. Julius having died in February, 
1513, Leo X. presided over the sixth session. 

At the eighth session, in December, 1513, Louis XII., 
through his ambassador, declared his adhesion to this 
Council of the Lateran. At the eleventh session, in 
December, 1516, the bull was read which, in place of the 
Pragniatic Sanction of Bourges (1438), wherein France 
accepted the decisions of the Basle Council, in so far as 
thev were consistent with the liberties of the (Jallican 
Church, substituted the concordat agreed upon this year 
(1516) between Leo X. and Francis I. Through hope 
of increasing his power in Italy, Francis largely sacri- 
ficed the liberties of the church. Several of the articles 
of the Pragniatic, which had re-established the right of 
election, while the concordat declares that the chapters 
of the cathedrals in France shall no longer proceed to 
elect the bishop in case of vacancy, but that the king 
shall name a proper person, whom the Pope shall nom- 
inate to the vacant see. The concordat, on account es- 
pecially of this provision, met with great opposition in 
the parliament, universities and the church at Paris. It 
was a great advance of the papacy against the liberties 
of France (Janus, Pope and Convert, xxviii. and xxix. -. 

Neither this council, nor the other four, viz.: those of 



246 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

1123, 1139, 1179 and 1215, styled eecumemcal by the 
Romish Church, can be properly regarded as such. 
Some writers mention as the sixth Lateran the council 
convened by Pope Benedict XIII. on the bull Unigenitus, 
and for the purpose of general reform in the church. 

THE COUNCILS OF LYONS. 

Lyons is a city .of France, and is situated 316 miles 
southeast of Paris, and is noted in ecclesiastical history 
as the seat of two secumeuical councils, the first of 
which was held in 1245, consisting of 140 bishops, and 
convened for the purpose of promoting the crusades, re- 
storing ecclesiastical discipline, and dethroning Fred- 
erick II., emperor of Germany. It was also decreed at 
this council that cardinals should wear red hats. 

.At the second council, held in 1274, there were 500 
bishops present, and about 1,000 "inferior clergy." Its 
principal object was the reunion of the Greek and Latin 
Churches. The first of these councils was held under 
the pontificate of Innocent IV., and the second under 
the pontificate of Gregory X. 

COUNCILS OF VIENNE. 

Vienne is a city of Dauphine, France, where numerous 
Church councils were held. 

I. The first of which mention is made was held in 
474; of its transactions nothing is known beyond the 
fact that it sanctioned the solemn observance of the 
three days preceding Ascension-day, which Bishop 
Mamercus, of Vienne, had ordered. 

II. The one held in 870 simply confirmed the priv- 
ileges bestowed upon a monastery. 

III. Held in 892, by order of Pope Formosus, whose 
two legates, Pascal and John, presided. Several bishops 



REEOKMATOKY MOVEMENTS. 247 

were present, and the following canons were published: 
i, 2. Excommunicate those who seize the property "of 

the Church, or maltreat clerks. 

4 Forbids laymen to present to churches without the 

consent of the bishop of the diocese ; also forbids them 

to takj any present from those whom they present. 

(Mausi, Concil ix, 433). 

IV. Held in 907 ; was concocted by Archbishop 
Alexander, of Vienne, and adjusted a dispute between 
Abbots Aribert and Barnard respecting the income re- 
ceipts of monasteries. 

V. Held in 1112 by Archbishop Guido ; excommuni- 
cated Emperor Henry V., because he claimed the right of 
episcopal investiture, and revoked the treaty of 1111 
which conferred such right upon the crown. 

VI. Held in 1119; was called by Pope Gelasius II., 
who had again excommunicated Henry V., on the oc- 
casion of his setting up an anti-pope in the person of 
Gregory VIII. ; but nothing whatever concerning the 
transactions of this synod is known. 

VII. Held in 1124; was incited by Pope Calixtus II., 
and called by Archbishop Peter, of Vienne ; legislated 
with reference to the securing of ecclesiastical privileges 
and possessions. 

VIII. Held in 1142 ; was chiefly concerned with the 
election of a new bishop. 

IX. Held in 1164, at which Archbishop Reginald, of 
Cologne, vainly endeavored to secure a recognition of 
Paschal III., whom the Emperor Frederick had endorsed. 

X. Held in 1199, by the Cardinal-legate Peter of 
Capua, for the purpose of promulgating the decree of 
Pope Innocent III., which punished the King Philip 
Augustus with excommunication on account of his re- 
nunciation of Inneburgis, his lawful consort ; and his 



248 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

subsequent marriage with Agnes, of Meran. (Mansi 
Concil xi, 11). 

XI. Held in 1289 ; is barely mentioned in the records, 
and some authorities deny that it was held. 

XII. Held in 1311 ; known as the fifteenth secumcni- 
cal council, and the only one of the series to which at- 
taches any considerable importance. It was originally 
ordered, by a papal bull of 1308, to meet Oct. 1, 1310, 
but was subsequently postponed for one year. The 
council finally convened under the presidency of Pope 
Clement V. , October 16, 1311. The number of prelates 
present is fixed by some at 114, and by others at 300, in- 
cluding the patriarchs of the Latin Rite of Alexandria 
and Antioch. It discussed methods for preserving the 
purity of the faith, which was impaired by the heretical 
influence of John, of Olivia, and of the Fratricelli, 
Dolcinists, Beghards and Beguins ; also the aid to be 
afforded -the Holy Land; the reform of ecclesiastical 
discipline ; and especially the disposition to be made of 
the Order of Knights Templars. The decision abrogated 
the Order of Templars; declared the legitimacy of the 
late Pope Boniface VIII. , and his freedom from the 
crimes charged against him; conceded titles for six 
years to the kings of France, England and Navarre, in 
order that they might organize a crusade; and regulated 
the government of the begging friars and similar 
matters. Most of the decrees which have to do with 
matters of doctrine and discipline are contained in the 
so-called Clementines, and were first promulgated by 
Pope John XXII. (London Manual of Councils, 5 v.). 

XIII. Held in 1557; it determined several questions 
of Church discipline; discussed the use of sermons as a 
means of instructing the people; forbade the admission 
of strangers to the pulpits; demanded the rendition of 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 249 

heretics; and prohibited merr} T - makings on feast-days 
and association with suspected persons ; gave directions 
concerning the tonsure and garb of priests; denied to 
monks and nuns the privilege of leaving their convents, 
etc. (Martine Thesaur. Novus Anecdot — Lutet Par. 
1717, iv, 446 sq.). 

COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE. 

This council was summoned at the dictation of Pope 
John XXIII., in accordance with the writ of the Em- 
peror Sigismund, and continued its sessions from 1414 
to 1418. One of its professed objects was to put an end 
to the schism which had lasted for thirty years, and 
which was caused by the several claimants for the pon- 
tificate. At this time, besides John (Balthasar Cossa), 
two others claimed the title of pope, viz., Pedro of 
Luna, a native of Catalonia, who styled himself Bene- 
dict XIII., and Angelo Corrario, a Venetian, who as- 
sumed the name of Gregory XII. Another object of 
the council was to take cognizance of the so-called her- 
esies of Huss and WicklifTe. The council was called to 
meet at Constance on the festival of All-Saints, in 1414, 
and so great was the influx of people, that it was esti- 
mated that not less than 30,000 horses were brought to 
Constance, which may give some idea of the immense 
multitude of human beings. It is stated that during 
the session, the Emperor, the Pope, twenty princes, 140 
counts, more than twenty cardinals, seven patriarchs, 
twenty archbishops, ninety-one bishops, 600 other cleri- 
cal dignitaries, and about 4000 priests, were present at this 
celebrated convocation. The pretended heresies of Wick- 
liffe and Huss were here condemned, and the latter, not- 
withstanding the assurances of safety given him by the 
Emperor, was burnt at the stake July 0, 141 5, and his friend 



250 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

and companion, Jerome of Prague, met with the same 
fate, May 30, 1416.. The three popes were formmly de- 
posed, and Martin Y. was legally chosen to the chair of 
St. Peter; but instead of furthering the Emperor's wishes 
for a reformation in the affairs of the Church, he 
thwarted his plans, and nothing was accomplished till 
the council of Basle. At this council the question was 
very warmly agitated whether the authority of an 
oecumenical council is greater than that of the Pope or 
not? Gerson "proved (so it is asserted) that in cer- 
tain cases the Church, or, which is the same thing, an 
oecumenical council, can assemble without the command 
or consent of the Pope, even supposing him to have been 
canonically elected, and to live respectably." These 
peculiar cases, he states to be, "1. If the Pope, being 
accused, and brought into a position requiring the opin- 
ion of the Church, refuses to convoke a council for the 
purpose. 2. When important matters, concerning the 
government of the Church, are in agitation, requiring 
to be set at rest by an oecumenical council, which, never- 
theless, the Pope refuses to convoke." (Herzog, Real 
JSncykL, iii, 144, and many other authorities.) 

THE COUNCIL AT BASLE. 

This council was called by Pope Martin V., and con- 
tinued by Eugenias IV. It was opened July 23, 1431, 
by Cardinal Julian, and closed May 16, 1443, forty-live 
sessions in all having been held, of which the iirst twenty- 
five were acknowledged by the Gallican Church. The 
Ultramontanes reject it altogether, but " on grounds 
utterly untenable," it is said. The council, in its thirti- 
eth session, declared that " a general council is superior 
to a pope ; " and, in 1437, Eugenius transferred its ses- 
sions to Ferrara. The council refused to obey, and con- 



REFOKMATOEY MOVEMENTS. 251 

tinued its sessions at Basle, the capitol of a canton of 
the same name in Switzerland. The principal objects 
for which this council was called, were the reformation 
of the Church, and the reunion of the Greek with the 
Roman Church. "Many of its resolutions were ad- 
mirable both in spirit and form; and had the council 
been allowed to continue its sessions, and had the Pope 
sanctioned its proceedings, there would have ensued a 
great and salutary change in the Roman Church." But 
the power of the papacy was at stake, and the reform 
was suppressed. Its most important acts were as fol- 
lows : 

In the first session, December 7, 1431, the decree of 
the council of Constance, concerning the celebration of 
a general council after five and after seven years, was 
read, together with the bull of Martin V. convoking the 
the council, in which he named Julian, president; also 
the letter of Eugene TV. to the latter upon the subject; 
afterward the six objects proposed in calling the council 
were enumerated : 1. The extirpation of heresy. 2. 
The reunion of all Christian persons with the Catholic 
Church. 3. To afford instruction in the true faith. 4. 
To appease the wars between Christian princes. 5. To 
reform the Church in its head and in its members. 6. 
To re-establish, as far as possible, the ancient discipline 
of the Church. 



It soon appeared that Pope Eugene was determined 
to break up the council, which took vigorous measures 
of defense. In the second session (Feb. 15, 1432) it was 
"declared that the synod, being assembled in the name 
of the Holy Spirit, and representing the Church mili- 
tant, derives its power directly from our Lord Jesus 
Christ, and that all persons, of whatever rank or dignity, 
not excepting the Roman pontiff himself, are bound to 



252 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

obey it ; and that any person, of whatever rank or coiIn 
dition, not excepting the Pope, who shall refuse to obey 
the laws and decrees of this or any other general coun 
cil, shall be put to penance and punished." 

In the third session (April 29, 1432) Pope Eugene was 
summoned to appear before the council within three 
months. In August the Pope sent legates to vindicate 
his authority over the council ; and in the eighth session 
(Dec. 18,) it was agreed that the Pope should be pro- 
ceeded against canonically, in order to declare him con- 
tumacious, and to visit him with the canonical penalty; 
two months' delay, however, being granted him tvithin 
which to revoke his bull for the dissolution of the coun- 
cil. 

On the 16th of January, 1433, deputies arrived from 
the Bohemians, demanding (1) liberty to administer the 
Eucharist in both kinds; (2) that all mortal sin, anl es- 
pecially open sin, should be repressed, corrected, and 
published, according to God's law; (3) that the Word of 
God should be preached faithfully by the bishops, and 
by such deacons as were fit for it ; (4) that the clergy 
should not possess authority in temporal matters. It 
was afterward agreed that the clergy in Bohemia and 
Moravia should be allowed to give the cup to the laity ; 
but no reconciliation was effected. In April, 1433, 
Eugene signified his willingness to send legates to the 
council to preside in his name, but the council refused 
his conditions. In the twelfth session (July 14, 1433,) 
the Pope, by a decree, was required to renounce within 
sixty days his design of transferring the council from Basle, 
upon pain of being pronounced contumacious. In return, 
Eugene, irritated by these proceedings, issued a bull, an- 
nulling all the decrees of the council against himself. 
Later in autumn, the Pope, in fear of the council, sup- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 253 

ported as it was by the Emperor and. by France, agreed 
to an accommodation. He chose four cardinals to pre- 
side with Julian at the council ; he revoked all the bulls 
which he had issued for its dissolution, and published 
one according to the form sent him by the council. 
[Session XIV]. It was to the effect that, although he 
had broken up the council at Basle lawfully assembled, 
nevertheless, in order to appease the disorders which 
had arisen, he declared the council to have been law- 
fully continued from its commencement, and that it 
would be so to the end ; that he approved of all that it 
had offered and decided, and that he declared the bull 
for its dissolution, which he had issued, to be null and 
void; thus, as Bossuet observes, setting the council above 
himself, since, in obedience to its order, he revoked his 
own decree, made with all the authority of his pontifical 
see. In spite of this forced yielding, Eugene never 
ceased plotting for the dissolution of the council. In 
subsequent sessions earnest steps were taken toward re- 
form ; the annates and taxes (the Pope's chief revenues) 
were abrogated; the papal authority over chapter elec- 
tions were restricted ; citations to Eome on minor grounds 
were forbidden, etc. These movements increased the 
hatred of the papal party, to which, at last, Cardinal 
Julian was won over. The proposed reunion of the 
Greek and Roman churches made it necessary to ap- 
point a place of conference with the Greeks. The coun- 
cil proposed Basle or Avignon ; the papal party de- 
manded an Italian city. The latter, in the minority, 
left Basle, and Eugene called an opposition council to 
meet at Ferrara in 1437. After Julian's departure the 
Cardinal Archbishop of Aries presided. 

In the thirty-first session, Jan. 24, 1438, the council 
declared the Pope Eugene contumacious, suspended him 



254 HISTORY OF CIIUKC1I COUNCILS. 

from the exercise of all jurisdiction, temporal or spiritual, 
and pronounced all that he should do to be null and 
void. In the twenty-fourth session, June 25, 1439, sen- 
tence of deposition was pronounced against Eugene, 
making use of the strongest possible terms. France, 
England and Germany disapproved of this seutence. On 
October 30, Amadeus, Duke of Savoy, was elected Pope, 
and took the name of Felix V. Alphonso, King of 
Aragoh, the Queen of Hungary, and the Dukes of 
Bavaria and Austria, recognized Felix, as also did the 
Universities of Germany, Paris and Cracow; but France, 
England and Scotland, while they acknowledged the 
authority of the council of Basle, continued to recognize 
Eugene as the lawful Pope. Pope Eugene dying four 
years after, Nicholas V. was elected in his stead, and 
recognized by the whole Church, whereupon Felix V. 
renounced the pontificate in 1449, and thus the schism 
ended. (Mansi, vols. 29 to 31 ; London, Manual of 
Councils, 74; Palmer, On the Church; Moshiem; Church 
History; Ranke, History of Papacy, i, 36, 243. 

COUNCIL OF TRENT. 

This council is regarded by the Roman Catholic 
Church as the last in the order of assemblies known as 
oecumenical or general, and as the great repository of 
all the doctrinal judgments of that ecclesiastical body 
on the chief points at issue with the reformers of the 
sixteenth century. "Very early in this conflict with Leo 
X. , Luther had appealed from the Pope to a general 
council; and after the failure of the first attempts at an 
adjustment of the controversies, a general desire grew 
up in the Church for the convocation of a general coun- 
cil, in which the true sense of the Church upon the con- 
troversies which had been raised, might be finally and 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 255 

decretorially settled. Another, and, to many, a still 
more pressing motive for desiring a council, was the 
wish to bring about a reform of the alleged abuses as 
well of the Court of Rome as of the domestic discipline 
and government of local churches, to which the move- 
ment of the reformers was in part at least ascribed. But 
the measures for convoking a council were long delayed, 
owing partly, it has been alleged, to the intrigues of the 
party who were interested in the maintenance of those 
profitable abuses, and especially of the officials of the 
Roman court, including the cardinals, and even the 
popes themselves; but partly also the jealousies, and 
even the actual conflicts, which took place between 
Charles V. and the King of France, whose joint action 
was absolutely indispensable to the success of any ec- 
clesiastical assembly.'' (Chamber's Encyclopoedia, vol. 
ix., p. 533.) 

It was not till the pontificate of Paul III. (1534-1549) 
that the design assumed a practical character. One of 
the great difficulties was that in regard to a place of 
meeting. In these discussions much time was lost; and 
without entering into detail, it is sufficient to say that 
the assembly did not actually meet till December 13, 
1545, at which time four archbishops, twenty-two bishops, 
five generals of orders, and the representatives of the 
Emperor and of the King of the Romans, assembled at 
Trent, a city of the Tyrol. The number of prelates after- 
wards increased. The Pope was represented by three 
legates, who presided in his name, viz., Cardinals del 
Monte, Cervino and Pole. The first three sessions were 
devoted to preliminaries. It was not till the fourth ses- 
sion (April, 1546) that the really important work of the 
council began. It was decided, after much disputation, 
that the doctrinal questions and the questions of reforma- 
tion should both be proceeded with simultaneously. Ac- 



256 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

cordingly, the discussions on both subjects were continued 
through the fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh sessions, in 
all of which "matters of great moment were decided; " 
when a division between the Pope and the Emperor, 
who, by the victory of Muhlberg, had become all-power- 
ful in the empire, made the former desirous to transfer 
the council some place beyond the reach of Charles' 
arbitrary dictation. The appearance of the plague at 
Trent furnished a cause for removal, and in the eighth 
session a decree was passed (March 11, 1547) transferring 
the council to Bologna. 

The change of place was opposed by the bishops 
who were in the imperial interest, and the division 
which ensued had the effect of suspending all practical 
action. In the meantime, Paul III. died. Julius III., 
who had, as Cardinal del Monte, presided as legate in 
the council, took measures for its resumption at Trent, 
where it again assembled, May 1, 1551. The sessions 
9-12, held partly at Bologna, and partly at Trent, were 
spent in discussions regarding the suspension and re- 
moval ; but in the thirteenth session the real work of 
the assembly was renewed, and was continued, slowly, 
but with great care, till the sixteenth session, when, on 
account of the apprehended insecurity of Trent, the 
passes of the Tyrol having fallen into the hands of 
Maurice, of Saxony, the sittings were again suspended 
for two years. 

But the suspension was destined to continue for no 
less than nine years. Julius III. died in 1555, and was 
followed rapidly to the grave by his successor (who had 
also been his fellow-legate in the council as Cardinal 
Cervina) Marcellus II. The pontificate of Paul IV. 
(1555-1559) was a very troubled one, as well on account 
of internal dissensions as owing to the abdication of 
Charles V.; nor was it till the accession of Pius IY. 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 257 

(1559-1565) that the bishops and legates were again 
brought together to the number of 102, under the presi- 
dency of Cardinal Gonzaga, reopening their deliberations 
with the seventeenth session. All the succeeding ses- 
sions were "devoted to matters of the highest import- 
ance," among which may be mentioned such doctrines 
and practices as (1) communion under one kind, (2) the 
sacrifice of the mass, (3) the sacrament of orders, (4) the 
nature and origin ot the grades of the hierarchy, (5) 
marriage and the many questions relating to it. These 
grave discussions occupied the sessions 17-24, and lasted 
till November 11, 1563. Much anxiety was expressed 
on the part of many bishops to draw the council to a 
conclusion, in order that they might be able to return 
to their sees in a time so critical; and accordingly, as 
the preliminary discussions regarding most of the re- 
maining questions had already taken place, decrees 
were prepared in special congregations comprising al- 
most all the remaining subjects of controversy, as (1) 
purgatory, (2) invocation of saints, (3) images, (4) relics, 
and (5) indulgences. Several other matters, rather of 
detail than of doctrinal principle, were referred to the 
Pope, to be by him examined and arranged ; and on the 
3d and 4th of December, 1563, these important decrees 
were finally read, approved and subscribed by the mem- 
bers of the assembly, consisting of four cardinal legates, 
two other cardinals, twenty-iive archbishops, 168 bishops, 
seven abbots, seven generals of orders and thirty-nine 
proxies of bishops, comprising in all 252. 

These decrees were confirmed January' 10, 1564, by 
by Pius IV., who had drawn up, based upon them in 
conjunction with the creeds previously in use, a profes- 
sion of faith known under his name. " The doctrinal 
decrees of the council were received at once throughout 
the Western Church, a fact which it is necessary to 



258 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

note, as the question as to the reception of the decrees 
of doctrine has sometimes been confounded with that re- 
garding the decrees of reformation or discipline."" As 
to the latter, delays and reservations took place. The first 
country to receive the decrees of the council as a whole, 
was the Republic of Venice. France accepted the dis- 
ciplinary decrees only piece meal and at intervals. 

The canons and decrees of the council of Trent were 
issued in Latin, and have been reprinted innumerable 
times. They have also been translated into almost 
every modern language. One of the supplementary 
works assigned to the Pope by the council at its break- 
ing up, was the completion of a catechism for the use of 
parish priests and preachers. This work has not all 
the authority of the council, but it is of the very highest 
credit, and is extensively used, having, like the canons 
and decrees, been very generally translated. Another 
similar work was the publication of an authentic edition 
of the Vulgate version of the Bible, as well as of the 
Breviary and Missal. All these have been accomplished 
at intervals; and there is besides at Rome a permanent 
tribunal, a congregation of cardinals, styled " Congregatio 
Interpres Concilii Tridentini," to which belongs the duty 
of dealing with all questions which arise as to the 
meaning, the authority, or the effect of the canons and 
decrees of this celebrated council. (Chamber's Ency- 
clopedia, vol. ix., p. 534.) 

It would occupy entirely too much space to give the 
dry and uninteresting details of this council. But we 
have given a faithful outline of its proceedings. Suffice 
to say that the Roman Catholic Church of the present 
day is but a counterpart, theologically and morally, of 
the council of Trent. During the various sittings of 
the sessions, such questions as these were discussed: the 
personal sin of Adam ; original sin ; the immaculate con- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 259 

ception of the Virgin Mary ; non-resident bishops ; justi- 
fication as opposed to Luther and other reformers; in- 
fant baptism; the validity of baptism; the conferring of 
grace by the sacraments ; transubstantiation as opposed 
to consubstantiation; extreme unction; priestly vest- 
ments ; a visible priesthood ; whether the cup should be 
given to the laity at the communion ; pictures and 
images ; a general overhauling of the theology of Luther 
and Zwingle and Melancthon. 

The importance of the so-called oecumenical councils 
has often been greatly over-estimated, not only by the 
Greeks and Roman Catholics, but also by many Protest- 
ants. John Jortin, D.D., an eminent preacher of the 
eighteenth century, and of the Church of England, tells 
us very forcibly that councils " were a collection of 
men who were frail and fallible. Some of these councils 
were not assemblies of pious and learned divines, but 
cabals, the majority of which were quarrelsome, fanati- 
cal, domineering, dishonest prelates, who wanted to com- 
pel men to approve all their opinions, of which they 
themselves had no clear conceptions, and to anathema- 
tize and oppose those who would not implicitly sub- 
mit to their determinations." (Works, vol. iii. , charge 2). 

The Romanists hold that the Pope alone can convene 
and conduct oecumenical councils, which are supposed, 
on their theory, to represent the universal Church under 
the guidance of the Holy Spirit. In matters of faith, 
councils profess to be guided by the Holy Scriptures and 
the traditions of the Church, while in lighter matters 
human reason and expediency are consulted. In matters 
of faith, oecumenical councils are held to be infallible, 
and hence it is maintained that all such synods have 
agreed together; but in matters of discipline, etc., the 
authority of the latest council prevails. The Roman 
claim is not sanctioned by history. The emperors called 



260 HISTORY OF CHURCH COUNCILS. 

the iirst seven councils, and either presided over them 
in person or by commissioners ; and the final ratification 
of the decisions was also left to the Emperor. But the 
Greek Church agrees with the Latin in ascribing ab- 
solute authority to the decisions of truly secumenical 
councils. Gregory of Nazianzus (who was president 
for a time of the second oecumenical council) speaks 
strongly of the evils to which such assemblies are liable. 
He says: " I am inclined to avoid conventions of bishops ; 
I never knew one that did not come to a bad end, and cre- 
ate more disorders than it attempted to rectify. " A remarka- 
ble view of the authority of councils was that of Nico- 
las of Clamengis, viz., that they, in his opinion, could 
claim regard for their resolutions only if the members 
were really believers, and if they were more concerned 
for the salvation of souls than for secular interests. His 
views on general councils were fully set forth in a 
little work entitled : Disputatio de concilio generally which 
consists of three letters, addressed in 1415 or 1416, to a 
professor at the Paris University (printed apparently at 
Vienna in 1482). He not only places the authority of 
general councils over the authority of the popes, but the 
authority of the Bible over the authority of the councils. 
He doubts whether at all the former secumenical councils 
the Holy Spirit really presided, as the Holy Spirit 
would not assist men pursuing secular aims. He denie s 
that a council composed of such men represents the 
Church, and asserts that God alone knows who are his 
people, and where the Holy Spirit dwells, and that there 
may be times when the Church can only be found in 
one single woman. After the lapse of over 300 years, 
the Pope in 1867 signified his purpose to summon an- 
other eecumenical (or universal) council ; but of course 
none but Roman bishops attended it. (McClintock and 
Strong's JEJncyclopoedia, vol. ii, p. 539.) 



GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 



FAITH AND SIGHT. 

In this age of unbelief and gross skepticism, where 
every possible attempt is made to undermine the very 
foundation of Christianity, and, if possible, to dethrone 
Jesus Christ, and rob him of his glory and his divinity, 
and where scoffers take pleasure in reducing the word 
of God to a level with the words of uninspired men, it 
devolves upon the defenders of the faith to review and 
reconsider the ground of their hope, and to re-establish 
in the hearts of believers their confidence in a divine 
revelation. Christians walk by faith, not by sight. 
Their faith in a divine revelation is founded upon testi- 
mony. They depend upon the common rules of evi- 
dence. They apply the same rules of interpretation to 
a divine revelation that they apply to a human compo- 
sition. Where there is no testimony there is no faith — 
upon any subject. Faith is made strong or weak accord- 
ing to the degree of testimony. In the absence of testi- 
mony there can be no faith. Every proposition must be 
established by its own kind of testimony. That is to 
say, a historical proposition must be proved by historical 
testimony; a proposition in mathematics must be dem- 
onstrated by mathematical principles; the science of 
geology (if there is such a science) must be established 
by the proofs of geology; a proposition in chemistry 

(261) 



262 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

must be sustained by the laws of physics; a supernatural 
proposition can only be sustained by supernatural testi- 
mony, and can not be sustained by the laws of nature 
The proof of spiritual things must be found, and can 
only be found, within the sphere of spiritual things, as 
the proof of mathematics can only be found within 
the realm of that science. These are all self-evident 
propositions, which no reasonable man will deny. 

Men testify to what they see and hear. But their 
own senses may deceive them, if there is not corrobora- 
tive and cumulative evidence. Circumstantial evidence 
is stronger than the evidence of the natural senses, and 
is so held in all courts of law and judicature. The 
qualities of a reliable witness are, (1) good eye-sight, 
(2) good hearing, (3) an honest heart. These were the 
qualities of the witnesses chosen by Jesus of Nazareth. 
Living in the open air continually, as was the case of 
the witnesses chosen by Christ, their hearing would 
naturally become very acute, and their vision would 
become very sensitive to all external objects. Christ 
did not go among princes to select his witnesses, nor 
choose from among the wealthy and the educated class- 
es, nor draw from the schools of philosophers and rhet- 
oricians, but he chose honest-hearted men, who, divested 
of the fetters and cares of a commercial and trading 
life, and of the conventionalities of the polite world, 
enjoyed the full possession of all their natural powers. 
The apostles were the witnesses of Jesus the Christ, 
and they testified before the court of the world as to 
what they saw and heard in the life of Christ, and their 
accumulated evidence challenges the world. If the test- 
imony — the accumulated testimony — of the apostles can 
not be relied upon, then no testimony in the world can 
be relied on, and all the testimony of the past ages, in 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 263 

ail the domains of fact, is nothing but a shapeless heap 
of chaos. 

It is not our purpose in this series of essays to inves- 
tigate the supernatural claims of Christianity, nor to 
undertake to prove that which, in a thousand ways and 
a thousand times, has been placed beyond doubt. We 
simply appeal to common-sense principles. We meet 
the infidel upon his own ground and ask no favors of 
him. The infidel believes there were such persons as 
Washington, Lafayette, Napoleon Bonaparte, Byron, 
Bacon, Piato, Aristotle, Csesar, Cicero, Demosthenes, 
Alexander the Great, Pliny, Plutarch, Herodotus, et al. 
How does he know there were such persons in existence 
at the times indicated by history? We answer by say- 
ing that by the same rules of evidence with which he 
proves the personalities of those historical characters, 
we prove the personality of Jesus of Nazareth. If once 
we prove the personality of Christ, it is easy to prove 
his supernatural origin, and hence his divinity; and this 
w^e propose to do by concessions which infidels them- 
selves unwillingly make. Men who stand highest in the 
ranks of infidelity, concede that Jesus was absolutely 
a pure and good man, and absolutely a perfect man, 
without the least taint of sin, and without the least 
semblance of imperfection. A man absolutely good and 
absolutely perfect cau not lie. This man, who is con- 
ceded to be absolutely perfect as a man, said: "I am the 
Son of God;" "I came down from heaven to seek and 
to save the lost;" "I am the Savior of men;" "I and 
my Father are one;" "I was in the bosom of my Father 
before the worlds began to be;" "I am the way, the 
truth and the life;" u Before Abraham was I am;" "I 
am the resurrection and the life;'' "No man can come 
to me, except the Father who sent me draw him, and / 



264 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

will raise him up at the last day." What we want to 
know is this: Did Christ utter a falsehood when he ut- 
tered these sentimeuts? Not if he was, as conceded by 
the infidel, absolutely good and absolutely pure and per- 
fect. As it was morally impossible for him to utter a 
falsehood, it is morally certain that he was Immanuel — 
God manifested in flesh. 

We now propose to consider the following- questions, 
as they relate to the subject of faith: (1) What is the 
definition of faith? (2) What is the foundation of faith? 
(3) How many kinds of faith are there? (4) How does 
faith come? (5) The objects of faith? (o) Illustrations 
of faith? 

I. Paul defines faith as "the evidence of thmgs hoped 
for, the conviction of things not seen/' (Iieb. xi. 1, 
Macknight's translation.) The best human definition 
of faith we ever heard of came from the lips of an Irish 
woman. When interrogated by her bishop as to the 
meaning of faith, she answered, after some hesitation, 
" Sir, faith means taking God at his word." Yery sim- 
ple, and yet how comprehensive. If all people were to 
"take God at his word," what a happy world this would 
be. If all men and all priests and pastors would put- 
out of sight all theories and all speculations, and all 
dreams and figments of the fancy, and all psychological 
sensations, and all mysterious and mystical impressions, 
and simply "take God at his word/' not only, as an 
effect, would God's children come to see eye to eye and 
stand upon the same basis of Christian union, but infi- 
delity itself would be shorn of its greatest strength of 
opposition, and quail before the majesty of God's eter- 
nal truth. 

We must distinguish between faith as an act of the 
mind, as influenced by testimony, and "the faith " as 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENT^. 265 

representing the system of salvation. To "contend 
earnestly for the faith," is to contend for that system 
of things which contains all the elements of the gospel. 
The apostles use the terms "the faith" and "the law 
of faith" interchangeably with "the doctrine" or the 
teaching. The apostles place "the faith" of the gospel 
in contrast with the "law of Moses." 

II. The foundation of faith is found in the divine 
testimonies. Facts produce testimony. A fact is some- 
thing done. An opinion is not something done. An 
opinion is what a man thinks, and his opinion may be 
right or it may be wrong. Opinions differ, but facts 
never. And yet many systems of religion, formulated 
in creeds, are but the systematized opinions of men, 
and, therefore, human, fallible and misleading, and also 
very sinful. Present knowledge does not produce faith. 
Whatever we are conscious of, by the sensation of hear- 
ing, seeing and tasting, does not constitute faith. We 
must always, to reason correctly and deduce logical con- 
clusions, distinguish between conscious knowledge, opin- 
ion and fact. The knowledge of sensation never enters 
the domain of faith, and yet many religious teachers 
substitute sensations for facts, and make sensations the 
evidence of pardon, instead of God's word or the Holy 
Scriptures, which are revealed to us as facts. Paul tells 
us distinctly, in his grand culminating argument, as 
recorded in Hebrews xi., that " without faith it is impos- 
sible to please God," and that "they who come to God 
must believe that he is, and that he is the re warder of 
them who diligently seek him." Under the Jewish law 9 
and in the days of the prophet Jeremiah, there were 
false prophets who presumed to substitute dreams, and 
psychological sensations, and vain imaginations, for the 
statutes of the Almighty. Jeremiah compares these 



LC'J GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 



animal sensations and God's word, and, while he repre- 
sents sensations as " chaff'," he, at the same time, repre- 
sents the word of God as "wheat." Please read the 
entire twenty-third chapter. The prophet of God says: 
u To the law and to the testimony; if any speak not 
according to this word, it is because there is no light in 
him." 

The accumulative testimonies of Matthew, Mark, Luke 
and John, concerning the Messiahship of Christ, and as 
regards his life and miracles, and, also, as touching upon 
the doctrine of immortality, which he enunciated, stand 
before the world as irrefutable facts. Says the apostle 
John, "And many other signs [miracles] truly did Jesus 
in the presence of his disciples, which are not written 
in this book. But these are written, that you might 
believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and 
that believing, you might have life through his name." 
(John xx. 30, 31.) Luke opens his narrative as follows: 
"Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth 
in order a declaration of those things which are most 
surely believed among us, even as they delivered them to 
us, who, from the beginning, were eye-witnesses and min- 
isters of the word: it seemed good to me also, having 
had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, 
to write to thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that 
thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein 
thou hast been instructed." In the preface of his sec- 
ond treatise — Acts of the Apostles — Luke thus writes : 
"The former treatise [the Gospel of Luke] have I made, 
Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and 
teach, until the day in which he was taken up, after that 
he through the Holy Spirit had given commandments 
to the apostles whom he had chosen : to whom, also, he 
showed himself alive after his passion [his suffering* 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 267 

and death], by many infallible proofs, being seen of them 
forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the 
kingdom of God: and, being assembled together with 
them, commanded them that they should not depart from 
Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, 
saith he, you have heard of me. v 

These treatises, with the corroborative testimonies of 
contemporaneous historians, furnish the facts of the 
foundation of our faith ; to which also may be added 
the invaluable testimony of Paul as recorded in the fif- 
teenth chapter of First Corinthians, the honest investi- 
gation of which has converted many an infidel. 

Having in a previous number established the founda- 
tion of Christian faith, we next propose to ascertain how 
many kinds of faith there are to be found in the Bible. 
On examination, we discover that there is only one kind 
of faith, for we are so informed by the apostle Paul, 
who tells us in Eph. iv. 5 that there is "one Lord, one 
faith and one baptism." 

III. God has endowed every rational man with intel- 
lectual power with which to examine testimony. The 
same faculties of the mind with which he investigates 
one proposition he investigates every proposition, wheth- 
er human or divine. There is not one set of mental 
faculties fitted, in a peculiar manner, for the investiga- 
tion of one proposition, and another set furnished for 
the examination of a different proposition, or a new set 
furnished as often as the character of the subject changes. 
We use the same faculties in examining the testimonies 
concerning Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and in in- 
vestigating his claims upon the world, that we use in 
trying to discover whether such a man as Moses, or 
Cyrus, or Pompey, or Cato, or Aurelius, had a real ex- 
istence. The same rules of evidence and of interpretation 



£G8 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

are applied in the exploration of all kinds of truth, just 
as the same eyes are used in viewing all objects, and just 
as the same ears are used in hearing all sounds, whether 
soft or harsh, whether harmonious or inharmonious. 
It does not follow that because we see different objects 
we have different sets of eyes, or that because we hear 
varied sounds we have various sets of ears, or that we 
have as many palates as the objects we taste. Dr. Buck's 
"Theological Dictionary" contains different kinds of 
faith, such as "saving faith," ''evangelical faith," "his- 
torical faith," "direct faith," "reflex faith," "dead faith/' 
"living faith," the "faith of works," the "faith of devils," 
the "faith of miracles," etc. No such incongruities are 
found in the Bible. These are all fanciful and specula- 
tive distinctions, conjured up in the minds of mystics 
and ascetics, who, having retired from the world and 
having entered their closets and their cloisters, lost their 
wits and became fools. Says Pollock : 

" Faith was bewildered much by men who meant 
To make it clear, so simple in itself, 
A thought so rudimental and so plain, 
That none by comment could it plainer make. 
All faith was one. In object, not in kind, 
The difference lay. The faith that saved a soul, 
And that which in the common truth believed, 
In essence were the same. Hear then, what faith, 
True Christian faith, which brought salvation, was : 
Belief in all that God revealed to men : 
Observe in all that God revealed to men, 
In all he promised, threatened, commanded, said, 
Without exception and without a doubt." 

IV. How does faith come? Paul informs us that 
a faith comes by hearing the word of God." (Rom. x. 17.) 
Some hold, and especially the mystics of many of the 
orthodox churches, that faith is the direct gift of God, 



REFORMATORY PRINCIPLES. £09 

and that no one can believe until he receives this gift. 
John Wesley says that faith, or the power to believe, 
is the gift of God, just as seeing is the gift of God, or 
hearing the gift of God; but if we close our eyes, which 
are the gift of God, we can not see; or if we stop our 
ears, which are also the gift of God, we can not hear. 
In like manner, though the "power to believe be the gift 
of God, if we close the eyes of our understanding we 
can not perceive the truth. The power to believe is one 
thing, to exercise that power is quite another thing. Just 
see how our Savioi in his address to the multitude ex- 
plains the method of perceiving and understanding the 
truth. He says : 

"And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, 
which says: By hearing you shall hear, and shall not 
understand; and seeing you shall see, and shall not per- 
ceive ; for this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears 
are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest 
at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with 
their ears, and should understand, with the heart, and should 
turn [new version] and I should heal them. But blessed 
are your eyes, for they see; and your ears, for they hear. 
For truly I say unto you, that many prophets and right, 
eous men have desired to see those things which you see- 
and have not seen them; and to hear those things w r hich 
you hear, and have not heard them." (Matt. xiii. 14-17. ) 

il Faith comes by hearing the word of God," and does 
not descend from heaven on a sunbeam or on a moon- 
beam; does not drop down from heaven in a napkin; 
does not flash from the golden tip of an angel's wing; 
does not appear upon the face of a cloud in the form 
of a cross ; does not whisper salvation in a passing breeze ; 
is not imparted to the soul of a sinner by a spark of 
electricity ; is not conveyed upon the white wings of a 



270 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

descending evangel of the skies; does not come upon 
stealthy wing from some dark cavern or whip out of 
some dense jungle. "But the righteousness which, is 
of faith speaks on this wise: Say not in thine heart, 
Who shall ascend into heaven (that is, to bring Christ 
down from above) ? or who shall descend into the deep 
(that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead)? But 
what says it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth 
and in thy heart; that is, the word of faith, which we 
preach. That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the 
Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thy heart that God hath 
raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For 
with the heart man believes unto righteousness; and with 
the mouth confession is made unto salvation." (Bom. 
x. 6-10.) 

Salvation is the gift of God, and this blessing is re- 
ceived through the medium of faith. See Eph. ii. 8. 
Facts produce testimony, testimony produces conviction 
— "convicts of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment 
to come;" conviction leads to repentance; repentance 
results in "the obedience of the faith," which is immer- 
sion into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
of the Holy Spirit. Faith is the medium of salvation 
from sin, just as eating and drinking are a medium 
through which physical life is sustained. It is not the 
manner of eating and drinking that sustains animal life, 
but it is the thing eaten. There is no virtue in faith as 
an act of the mind to save the soul, but it is the thing 
appropriated by faith or through faith that saves the 
soul. It is the thing believed that saves, and not the 
manner of believing. 

V. What is the great object of Christian faith ? On 
what object must faith terminate? Salvation is not in 
a thing, but in a person. The object of faith is not a 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 271 

creed, not a confession of faith, not a set of dogmas, not 
a " church standard," not a platform of principles, not a 
church, not the law of Moses, not the "Institutes" of 
Calvin, or the institutes of any other man; but Jesus 
Christ the Savior of the world. Salvation is in the 
person of Christ. "All the promises of God are in him 
yea, and in him Amen." The apostles preached "Christ 
and him crucified." They preached Christ as the "wis- 
dom of God and the power of God." "But of him are 
you in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, 
and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption." 
(1 Cor. i. 30.) On the clay of Pentecost Peter present- 
ed the Lord Jesus Christ as the great object of faith. 
" This is the stone which was set at naught of you build- 
ers, which is become the head of the corner. Neither 
is # there salvation in any other; for there is none other 
name under heaven given among men whereby we must 
be saved." (Acts iv. 11, 12.) "Him hath God exalted 
with his right hand to be a prince and a Savior, for to 
give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins." (Acts 
v. 31.) "To him gave all the prophets witness, that 
through his name whosoever believes in him shall re- 
ceive remission of sins." (Acts x. 43.) When Philip 
preached to the Ethiopian eunuch he "began at the 
same Scripture, and preached to him Jesus." The apos- 
tles never preached the Holy Spirit as the object of faith, 
but, being endowed with the Holy Spirit, they always 
presented the risen and glorified Christ as the supreme 
object of faith. They presented him as Prophet, Priest 
and King. They presented him in his death, burial and 
resurrection. They presented him in all his command- 
ments and ordinances. To "believe on the Lord Jesus 
Christ" is the same as to if obey the gospel of our Lord 

and Savior Jesus Christ." Christ says, "He that hath 

22 



272 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

the Son bath eternal life, and he that obeyeth [new ver- 
sion] not the Son hath not eternal life, but the wrath 
of God abicleth upon him." Ever since the introduction 
of sin, God has said, "The soul that sins, it shall surely 
die;" but Satan has persistently asserted from the be- 
ginning, in direct contradiction of the word of God, 
that the soul that sins shall not surely die. 

And this conflict between truth and falsehood has 
been raging through all past ages. As in the days of 
the prophet Ezekiel, so is it now; the land is flooded 
with lies and impostures. Many who profess to be lead- 
ers of the people " prophesy out of their own heart," 
and will not obey the word of the Lord; "they have 
seen vanity and lying divination," and the pulpits of the 
present day are filled with "vanity and lying divination." 
These modern deceivers "follow their own spirit;" they 
" divine lies," and they seduce the people with "visions 
of peace" when "there is no peace, saith the Lord God;" 
and "with lies" they make "the hearts of the righteous 
sad and strengthen the hands of the wicked, that he 
should not turn from his wicked way by promising him 
life" (Ezek. xiii. ) 

VI. The Bible is replete with illustrations of faith. 
Paul, in Heb. xi. , furnishes a whole chapter of noted 
examples. These illustrious characters shall live on in 
history to the final consummation. Men of faith, and 
only men of faith in all dispensations, have made the 
desert wastes of the world to bloom and blossom as the 
rose. Faith in God and confidence in his word hold 
the moral universe together — hold the moral govern- 
ment of God in equipoise. Infidelity would precipitate 
a universal crash. Remove such men of faith from the 
calendar of the first four thousand years of the world, 
as Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. £73 

Joseph, Joshua, David, Samuel, Samson, Jeremiah, 
Ezekiel, Isaiah, Nehemiah and Daniel, and there would 
be nothing left worthy of contemplation and admiration. 
Where men of faith have never lived and have never 
"walked with God;" where they have never lived in 
the "fear" of God; and where they never have "en- 
dured as seeing him who is invisible;" and where men 
and women, as "strangers and pilgrims on the earth," 
have not obeyed God, seeing the "promises" of God 
"afar off" — there you will find fields of desolation, un- 
rest, spiritual darkness, human misery, starving hearts 
and thirsty souls, business stagnation, undeveloped 
powers, the dead doctrine of fatalism, gloomy super- 
stition, groveling idolatry, selfishness, sordidness, hope- 
lessness, and the glamour of eternal forgetful n ess. Blot 
out of history the name of Jesus Christ, and the names 
of his apostles, and the names of the martyrs of God, 
and the names of all philanthropists, and the names of 
all reformers, and the names of all who have "walked 
with God," and you have nothing left to contemplate 
but a base world of blank desolation. It is a paradise 
lost. But thanks be to God that he has confirmed his 
oath by two immutable things, in which it is impossible 
for him to lie, that "we might have a strong consola- 
tion, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope 
set before us; which hope we have as an anchor to the 
ioul, both sure and steadfast, and which enters into that 
within the vail .; whither the forerunner is entered for 
us, even Jesus." (Heb. vi. 18, 19.) 

REFORMATION OF LIFE. 

If belief in testimony produces the conviction that 
Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the hope of the sin- 
ner, it is the " goodness of God that leads men to re- 



274 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

pentance." (Rom. ii. 4.) Convicted sinners are very 
apt to repent of their sins. Without conviction of sin 
there is no genuine reformation of life. Belief in testi- 
mony does not necessarily result in conviction of sin. 
It is said concerning Jesus of j^azareth, that " among 
the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because 
of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should 
be put out of the synagogue : for they loved the praise 
of men more than the praise of God." (John xii. 42.) 
The testimonies of God were not only intended to illu- 
minate the mind, but also, through conviction of sin, 
to change the character of the believer. When, like 
the prodigal son, a sinner comes to himself, he will 
change his course of life and return to God. Conscious 
of his helplessness and utter unworthiness; conscious 
of guilt with a sense of shame, and also realizing the 
infinite mercy and goodness of God, the sinner will seek 
to know the will of the Lord, and, having ascertained 
his will, he will hasten to carry out, in overt acts of 
obedience, the conditions of that will. God has com- 
manded all men everywhere to repent — reform ; but all 
men do not reform, though satisfied of the truth of the 
gospel. Christ told the apostles that when the Spirit 
came, the "Spirit of truth," or the truth revealed by 
the Spirit, whether spoken by the apostles or by " faith- 
ful men," would "convict the world of sin, of righteous- 
ness, and of judgment. " Men thus convicted are ready 
to cry out, "Men and brethren, what must we do to be 
saved?" To convince men of the truth of Christianity 
is one thing; to convict them of sin is another thing. 
Men who love sin more than they love God, will not 
reform as long as they remain in that condition of heart. 
John's preaching convicted of sin; Christ's preaching 
convicted his hearers of sin. The preaching of the apos- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 275 

ties had the same effect. Little of that kind of preach- 
ing is done at the present day, hence the failure in pro- 
ducing reformation of life in thousands who hear the 
truth and assent to it. The sensational preachers of 
this age induce thousands to subscribe to the fact that 
Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of men; 
but in less than six months from the time they gave as- 
sent to the proposition, they lapse back into the world, 
for the reason, first, that their "converts," were not 
grounded in the truth ; and, second, because they were 
not thoroughly convicted of the guilt and shame of sin. 
It is a "godly sorrow" that leads to a reformation of 
life, but "the sorrow of the world' 1 "works death." (1 
Cor. vii. 10.) 

Paul, before the Athenians, announces the broad prop- 
osition that God "now commands all men everywhere 
to repent" — to reform; "because he has appointed a 
day in the which he will judge the whole world in right- 
eousness by that man whom he has ordained; whereof 
he has given assurance to all men in that he has raised 
him from the dead." (Acts xvii. 30, 31.) 

The law of reformation is the same in all ages, wheth- 
er under the law of Moses or under the gospel of Christ. 
God, by Jeremiah, thus spoke to the house of Israel: 
"At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and 
concerning a kingdom, to pluck up and to pull down, 
and to destroy it; if that nation against whom I have 
pronounced, turn from their evil way, I will repent of 
the evil that I thought [or purposed] to do unto them. 
And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, 
and concerning a kingdom, to build and plant it; if it 
do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I 
will repent of the good wherewith I said I would benefit 
it." (Jer. xviii. 7-10.) Says Isaiah: "Seek ye the Lord 



276 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is 
near: let the wicked forsake his way, and the unright- 
eous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the 
Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our 
God, for he will abundantly pardon." (Isa. lv. 6, 7.) 
This principle of reformation under the Jewish economy, 
shows that w T hen the violators of God's law. " cut off 
their sins by righteousness" — by obeying the voice of 
the Lord — he will turn from his purpose of punishing 
them and pardon them. Under John's reformatory 
movement, while the old Jewish covenant was still 
alive and in force, and while he was " preaching the 
baptism of repentance for the remission of sins," as a 
work under the law, preparatory to the actual setting 
up of the kingdom of Christ, "the people asked him, 
saying, What shall we do then? He answers and says 
to them, He that has two coats, let him impart to him 
who has none; and he that has meat [food], let him do 
likewise. Then came also publicans to be baptized, and 
said to him, Master, what shall we do ? And he said to 
them, Exact no more [or extort no more taxes from the 
people] than that which is appointed you. And the 
soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what 
shall we do? And he said to them, Do violence to no 
man, neither accuse any falsely, and be content with 
your wages" — as those in the Roman Government. 
(Luke iii. 10-14.) John was unwilling to immerse any 
one who did not "bring forth fruits worthy of repent- 
ance." John laid the axe of reform "unto the root of 
the trees," and when he saw many of the Pharisees and 
Sadducees come to his baptism, he said to them : " 
brood of vipers, who, has w T arned you to flee from the 
wrath to come? Bring forth, therefore, fruits worthy 
of repentance." John, as a Jewish prophet and teacher, 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 277 

was addressing God's people under the law — addressing 
those who had apostatized from the faith of their fathers, 
John came to prepare a people for the Lord — to " pre- 
pare the way of the Lord " — but after the Lord came 
and established his church or kingdom by his apostles, 
the preparatory work of John ceased. A more thorough 
reformatory work was inaugurated by the apostles of 
Jesus Christ; a work which was not to be confined to 
the single race of the Jews, but which was intended to 
extend to all the nations of the earth, " beginning at 
Jerusalem/' 

Before Christ ascended on high, he said to his apos- 
tles : " Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ 
to suffer, and to rise from the dead the first day: and 
that repentance and remission of sins should be preach- 
ed in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusa- 
lem." (Luke xxiv. 46, 47.) The new dispensation, 
under Jesus Christ, was inaugurated on the memorable 
day of Pentecost. Here reformation of life and remis- 
sion of sins, for the first time, was preached in the name 
of the risen, coronated and glorified King. The gospel 
in fact never was preached until the apostle Peter preach- 
ed it — "Out of Zion shall go forth the law [of "the 
Spirit of life"], and the word of the Lord from Jerusa- 
lem." (Isa. ii. 3.) Peter, on the day of Pentecost, thus 
concluded his great sermon, as addressed to the Jews: 

This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we are all 
witnesses. Therefore, being by the right hand of God 
exalted, and having received of the Father the promise 
of the Holy Spirit, he has shed forth this, which you 
now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the 
heavens: but he says himself, The Lord said unto my 
Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thy foes 
thy footstool. Therefore let all the house of Israel know 
assuredly, that God has made that same Jesus, whom you 



278 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

have crucified, both Lord and Christ. Now when they 
heard this, they were pierced in their heart, and said to 
Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, 
what shall we do? Then Peter said to them, Repent 
[reform } T our lives], and be immersed every one of you 
in the name of [or by the authority of] Jesus Christ for 
the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of 
the Holy Spirit. For the. promise is to you and your 
children [your descendants], and to all who are afar off, 
even as many as the Lord our God shall call [by the gos- 
pel. See Rom. x. 14, 15]. And with many other words 
did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from 
this untoward generation. (Acts ii. 32-40.) 

Here were three thousand sinners — the "murderers 
and betrayers of Jesus Christ" — who were willing to 
reform their lives; and, as a proof of genuine reforma- 
tion, which was also a test of their faith in the glorified 
Christ, they were willing to submit to the positive ordi- 
nance of immersion, which, in other portions of apostolic 
teaching, is called "the obedience to the faith," or "that 
form of doctrine which was delivered," and which they 
had " obeyed from the heart." (Rom. i. 5, and vi. 17.) 

At the conclusion of the second sermon, delivered to 
the same people, Peter said: "Repent [reform] ye, there- 
fore, and turn [new version], that your sins may be blot- 
ted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from 
the presence of the Lord." (Acts iii. 19.) The word 
li turn" here corresponds with immersion in the first 
sermon; "blotted out" corresponds with "remission of 
sins;" and "the times of refreshing" corresponds with 
"the gift of the Holy Spirit," in the first sermon. In 
the first sermon, the order stands thus: (1) Reform, (2) 
be immersed, (3) remission of sins, (4) the gift of the 
Holy Spirit. As Peter would not contradict himself, 
being infallibly directed by the Holy Spirit, the order 
of the second sermon stands thus: (1) Reform, (2) turn 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 279 

(the overt act of immersion), (3) remission or (figurative- 
ly) the blotting out of sins, (4) the gift of the Spirit, or 
times of refreshing. If repentance is not mentioned in 
every case of conversion, it is implied; just as immersion 
is implied where it is not mentioned. Genuine repent- 
ance for sin leads to a salvation not to be repented of. 

Paul makes a clear distinction between a godly sorrow 
and a worldly sorrow, which conditions of the heart are 
represented in the original Greek by two different words. 
He thus addresses his Corinthian brethren: 

For though I made you sorry with a letter, I do not 
repent, though I did repent: for I perceive that the same 
epistle has made you sorry, though it were but for a sea- 
son. Now I rejoice, not that you were made sorry, but 
that you sorrowed to repentance; for you were made sorry 
after a godly manner, that }^ou might receive damage by 
us in nothing. For godly sorrow works repentance to sal- 
vation not to be repented of; but the sorrow of the world 
works death. (2 Cor. vii. 8-10.) 

When the "goodness of God" leads men "to repent- 
ance," being deeply convicted of sin, and they reform 
their lives from principle, they manifest a godly sorrow. 
But when men are suddenly taken down sick and think 
they are going to die, they become alarmed and begin 
to cry for help ; but it is not genuine repentance, because 
they do not repent through love for God; for, though 
they make promises of reformation upon their beds of 
sickness, when they recover they become worse sinners 
than they were before their sickness. As the captured 
thief is not sorry because he has stolen goods, but sorry 
because he has been caught, and goes to stealing again as 
soon as he is liberated, so the sinner, whose sorrow is 
only a worldly sorrow, is not sorry because he has sinned 
against God, but sorry because God has captured him and 
laid him low upon a bed of sickness ; for when restored 
23 



280 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

to health, though in his extremity he lustily called upon 
God for help, he goes off and sins worse than ever. [This 
is what Paul means by the "sorrow of the world that 
works death " — eternal death. In the same chapter from 
which we have quoted, Paul gives the result of genuine 
reformation, in the following words: "For behold this 
selfsame thing, that you sorrowed after a, godly sort, what 
carefulness it wrought in you ; yea, what clearing of 
yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, 
what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge ! 
In all things you have approved yourselves to be clear 
in this matter." 

These are the fruits of sincere and abiding reforma- 
tion. These are fruits worthy of repentance. Men who 
cut off their sins by righteous acts — by obeying all the 
commands of God — are on their way heavenward and 
homeward. Having become "the sons of God" by being 
born into the family of God, they continue to honor that 
high and holy relation by a godly walk and a chaste 
conversation. Having become "the servants of right- 
eousness," they have "their fruit unto holiness," and 
"the end, life everlasting." 

THE GOOD CONFESSION. 

A truly penitent believer is ready to confess faith in 
Christ as the Son of God and as his Savior, lie is will- 
ing to confess publicly that Jesus of Nazareth is the 
Messiah of God. In making this public profession, the 
confessor accepts all the obligations which the name of 
Christ carries with it. If need be, in bearing the name 
of Christ, he accepts obloquy, reproach, persecution, 
imprisonment, and even death itself. He who receives 
Christ as Prophet, Priest and King, and as the Captain 
of his salvation, and as his Guide and Examplar, will- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 281 

ingly assumes all the obligations which his public pro- 
fession of the name of Christ involves. He is willing 
and ready to step at the command of his great Captain. 
He who is thoroughly persuaded by evidence incon- 
trovertible that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, enlists 
in his service with a high and holy determination, and 
with no mental reservation, to follow him in every detail 
of duty, and to give the work of Christ a prominence 
above any other work he may engage in. Christ is very 
explicit in regard to those who confess his name. He 
says: "Whoever therefore shall confess me before men, 
him will I confess also before my Father who is in 
heaven. But whoever 'shall deny me before men, him 
will I also deny before my Father who is in heaven." 
(Matt. x. 32, 33.) Again he says: "Whoever shall be 
ashamed of me and my words, of him shall the Son of 
man be ashamed when he shall come in his own glory, and 
in his Father's, aud of the holy angels." (Luke ix. 26.) 
Paul says; "I am not ashamed of the gospel of 
Christ" (Rom. i. 16), and to his son Timothy he writes: 
"Be not thou ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, 
nor of me his prisoner; but be thou partaker of the 
afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God." 
(2 T ; m. i. 8.) Again, quoting from Isaiah xxviii. 16, 
Paul says: "As it is writteu, Behold, I lay in Zion a 
stumbling stone and rock of offense; and whoever be- 
lieves on him shall not be ashamed" — shall not be con- 
founded. (Rom. ix. 33.) After exhorting Timothy not 
to be ashamed of the testimony of Christ, and after 
speaking of his own sufferings, Paul says: "For the 
which cause I also suffer these things; nevertheless, I 
am not ashamed, for I know whom 1 have believed 
[trusted], and am persuaded that he is able to keep that 
which I have committed to him against that day." 



282 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

(2 Tim. i. 12.) And in the sixteenth verse lie says, 
"and [I] was not ashamed of my chain." Hear Paul 
again: "For it became him for whom are all things, 
and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto 
glory, to make the Captain of their salvation perfect 
through sufferings. For both he who sanctities and 
they who are sanctified are all one; for which cause he 
is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, I will de- 
clare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the 
church will I sing praise unto thee. And again, I will 
put my trust in him. And again, Behold me and the 
children which God has given me." (Heb. ii. 10-13.) 
And of the righteous of all ages who trust in God and 
who walk by faith, Paul says that "God is not ashamed 
to be called their God." (Heb. xi. 16.) 

The good confession only embraces one article of faith, 
but it is comprehensive of all that can be confessed con- 
cerning Christ, and here it is: "And many other signs 
truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which 
are not written in this book; but these are written that 
you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of 
God; and that, believing, you might have life through 
his name." (Jno. xx. 30, 31.) An illustration of what 
confession means is seen in the conversion of the 
Ethiopian eunuch: "And as they went on their way 
they came to a certain water: and the eunuch said, See 
. . . water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And 
Philip said, If thou belie vest with all thine heart, thou 
mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus 
Christ is the Son of God." (Acts viii. 36, 37.) What 
more can a man believe than to believe with all his heart ? 
If a man believes with all his heart, he gives his whole 
heart to God; for the word "heart" is frequently used 
in the Scriptures to represent the entire man — body, soul 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 283 

and spirit — as for instance when God says, "Son, give 
me thine heart;" or, as Christ says, " Where your 
treasure is, there will your heart he also." When a 
patriot is asked, in time of war, to lay his heart upon 
the altar of his country, every one knows that it means 
the entire consecration of his life — money, time and 
influence, and even the offering up of his body — to the 
service of his country. 

Any ordinary intellect can make the "good confes- 
sion," and take in the full meaning of confessing the 
name of Christ, but no living soul can comprehend the 
Thirty-nine Articles which some of the orthodox creeds 
contain. These Articles confuse, and mislead, and 
make the word of God of none effect. The simplest 
soul, upon the testimony of the prophets and apostles, 
can say, and say it intelligently, "I believe that Jesus 
Christ is the Son of God." There is encouragement to 
a believer in this, but a man of reason and of intelligent 
faith will turn away in disgust, and in pardonable un- 
belief, from metaphysical and scholastic articles of faith 
— the production of fallible and foolish men. Paul 
writes to his son Timothy thus: "Fight the good fight 
of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art 
also called, and hast professed a good profession before 
many witnesses. I give thee charge in the sight of God, 
who quickens all things, and before Christ Jesus, who 
before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession ; that 
thou keep his commandment without spot, unrebukable, 
until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Tim. 
vi. 12-14.) The same Greek word which is here trans- 
lated "confession," in verse twelve is translated "pro- 
fession," and refers to the fact that the Lord Jesus, 
when standing at the bar of Pilate, who claimed to have 
power over his life, did not shrink from an open avowal 



284 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

of the truth. Timothy, no doubt, witnessed a good 
confession when he first espoused the cause of Christ, 
and made a public profession of it in the presence of the 
congregation and of the world, which, doubtless, was 
the practice in the primitive order of things. "Such a 
method," says Barnes, "of admitting members to the 
church would have been natural, and would have been 
fitted to make a deep impression on others. It is a good 
thing often to remind professors of religion of the feel- 
ings which they had when they made a profession of 
religion; of the fact that the transaction was witnessed 
by the world; and of the promises which they then 
made to lead holy lives. One of the best ways of stimu- 
lating ourselves or others to the faithful performance of 
duty, is the remembrance of the vows then made; and 
one of the most effectual methods of reclaiming a back- 
slider, is to bring to his remembrance that solemn hour 
when he publicly gave himself to God." 

Paul, in his epistle to the Romans, makes allusion to 
the good confession in these words: "The word is nigh 
thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart; that is, the 
word of faith, which we preach; that if thou shalt con- 
fess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in 
thy heart that God has raised him from the dead, thou 
shalt be saved; for with the heart man believes unto 
righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made 
unto [or in order to] salvation." (Rom. x. 8-10.) Even 
in the days of Christ's personal ministration on earth, 
it was deemed both unsafe and unpopular to confess his 
name. Hence the refusal of the parents to tell who it 
was that cured their son of his blindness ; " because they 
feared the Jews ; for the Jews had agreed already, that 
if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be 
put out of the synagogue." (Jno. ix. 22.) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 285 

There are plenty of people at this present time who, 
like the man and woman referred to, would far rather 
deny the truth which brought Christ to the cross, and, 
if possible, avoid the consequences of following that 
truth, than to be cast out of orthodox synagogues, and 
thus lose caste in fashionable society. There are thous- 
ands of nominal Christians who follow Christ afar off, 
and who deem it safe and honorable to acknowledge a 
historical Christ; but the very moment you ask them to 
take up the cross, and to follow him through good and 
evil report — to humble themselves by obeying his com- 
mands — to go down into the water to be buried in the 
likeness of his death — then it is that they ask to be 
excused, and turn away from the despised Nazarene. 
They may not feel ashamed of the great historical 
character, in his glory and exaltation, in his triumphal 
march among the nations, and in his mighty conquests, 
which he accomplishes by unseen and providential 
agencies, but they are "ashamed of his words;" that is, 
individually, they are not willing to obey his "words," 
which, if obeyed, would humble them in the eyes of the 
world. He who receives the words of Christ, which he 
says will judge him in the last day,' becomes an humble 
man, a godly man, a praying man, a self-denying man, 
a generous-hearted and philanthropic man. There are 
many people who, in synagogues of fashion, will pay 
tithes of anise and cummin and frankincense, and all 
sorts of highly flavored spices, but who, when called 
upon to deal out love and mercy and truth, which are 
the weightier matters of the law, will practically deny 
Jesus Christ. Many will follow him for the miracle of 
the loaves and fishes, but turn away from him the mo- 
ment he inculcates truth and righteousness. Many are 
willing to adore Christ as King and Conqueror, and 



286 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

ready to "crown him Lord of all," and sing hallelujahs 
to him as " Prince of Peace," who, if called upon, would 
refuse to assist him in bearing his cross; would refuse 
to watch with him at the garden of Gethsemane; would 
refuse to follow him to the cross; would deny him in 
the presence of his persecutors; would desert him in the 
agonies of death. But the glorious Paul says, "For me 
to live is Christ; for me to die is gain" — the gain of the 
glory of God. 

IMMERSION. 

We use the term immersion, because that is the term 
that should be employed invariably by a people engaged 
in a reformatory movement, that has for its end and ob- 
ject the complete restoration of the apostolic order of 
things. The Bible does not speak of " modes of immer- 
sion," but speaks of " one immersion " — of one specific 
act which conveys only one distinct idea. 

Among honest and educated men there is no contro- 
versy on the subject of immersion. The controversy 
rests upon the assertion that sprinkling or pouring will 
answer the same purpose, an assumption wholly unwar- 
ranted, and as such it must be regarded as a direct vio- 
lation of the law of God, and therefore a grievous sin. 

Immersion is a necessary element in the plau of sal- 
vation. It is ordained as one of the conditions upon 
which is suspended the salvation of the sinner. The 
command to be immersed emanates from the Head of 
the Church — from Jesus the Christ, who has all author* 
ity both in heaven and upon the earth. We find na 
"non-essentials" in the economy of divine grace; but 
w-e do find that wicked and designing men pronounce 
immersion a "non-essential," which they do at the peril 
of eternal reprobation. All the commands of Jesua 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 287 

Christ are essential to salvation. If not, why should 
they be commanded? Immersion is a divine positive 
institution, authorized by the infinite God, for the ordi- 
nation of which he presumes to give no reason to mortal 
men. 

It is enough for us to know that God, through Jesus 
Christ, has ordained it, and that acceptance with God 
and remission of sins depend upon its observance. If 
Jesus Christ is the Son of God, as we verily believe, 
there is no escape from this conclusion. 

If we believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, 
and that we have life through his name, then immersion 
into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Spirit becomes an act of faith. If we can reject 
one command we can reject all, because, in rejecting one, 
we not only show that we have no faith in the Son of 
God as our Savior, but we also insult the majesty of the 
law-maker. An inspired apostle says: "He who keeps 
the whole law, and yet offends in one point, is guilty 
of all." The very fact that the ordinance of immersion, 
or rather the negative of immersion, has been the source 
of endless controversy from the beginning of the apos- 
tasy down to the present time, not only shows the rebel- 
liousness of the human heart in undertaking to change 
the ordinance of God, but also shows, with peculiar 
emphasis, what importance is attached to it. It is evi- 
dent that the Lord intended immersion as a test to the 
carnal heart. It is intended as a radical test of faith 
and obedience. Some other test would accord with the 
divine government just as well, if the Lord had so or- 
dained. Christ says, "Whoever humbles himself shall 
be exalted," and whoever denies himself aud takes up 
his cross, may become a disciple of Christ; and we feel 
sure that there is nothing more wisely intended to hum- 



288 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

ble the proud heart of the sinner, than his utter help- 
lessness in the waters of baptism, while in the hands of 
the administrator. If the belief of a lie and the viola- 
tion of a divine positive command — the eating of the 
forbidden fruit — in the garden of Eden, merited the 
disfavor of God, and was the cause of their banishment 
from his presence; certainly, by the same parity of rea- 
soning, an antidote to that fatal sin is found in the gos- 
pel, where the belief of the truth and the honoring of 
a divine positive institution restore the penitent believer 
to the favor of God, who receives him back as a prodigal 
and remits all his sins. Christ says in the most positive 
language, "Except a man be born of water and of the 
Spirit he can not enter the kingdom of God." Preachers 
-*-" false teachers" — will brazenly stand up and tell the 
people that they can enter the kingdom of God without 
being born of water. When the Lord placed an inter- 
dict upon the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, 
he said to Adam and Eve, "In the day thou eatest there- 
of thou shalt surely die," or ''dying thou shalt surely 
die." But Satan, transformed into an angel of light, 
comes forward and puts in a negative, and contradicts 
the Almighty by saying, " In the day thou eatest there- 
of thou shalt not surely die;" and that controversy be- 
tween light and darkness has been going on ever since. 
Just before Christ ascended into the heavens he placed 
in the hands of the apostles the great commission, which 
says: "All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. 
Go you, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, 
immersing them into the name of the Father, and of 
the Son, and of the Holy Spirit; teaching them to ob- 
serve all things whatsoever I have commanded you." 
In harmony with this commission, and under the guid- 
ance of the Holy Spirit, the apostle Peter, in answer to 



UEFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 289 

three thousand convicted sinners on the day of Pente- 
cost, said, by the authority of the coronated and glorified 
King: "Repent, and be immersed every one of you in 
the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and 
you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." If the 
" Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God 
against themselves, being not baptized of him," what 
will the end of them be who reject the ordinance of the 
Son of God? 

Thus have we briefly established the authority and 
the necessity of immersion. The man who is not dis- 
posed to be hypercritical and skeptical, and who is an 
honest and patient investigator of the written testimony, 
asks no further proof than that which is recorded by 
the sacred historians. The importance of the institu- 
tion is shown by the fact that the word immerse, with 
its cognates, is used about one hundred times in the 
!N"ew Testament. It is used about eighty times in con- 
nection with the ordinance of immersion. We learn by 
the very best authorities — lexical, philological, archaeo- 
logical and historical — that the original word ^anrc^a) 
(baptizo) never means to sprinkle or to pour, not even 
metaphorically. Baptism is not an English word, but 
it is a Greek word anglicized; i. e. f it has an English 
termination. As immerse, sprinkle and pour are three 
specific words, having three specific meanings, and, as 
such, can not be used interchangeably without making 
nonsense, the word baptizo must either mean specifically 
immerse, or sprinkle or pour. If it means specifically 
immerse, then sprinkle and pour can not be included. 
If it means specifically sprinkle, then immerse and pour 
can not be included; or if it means specifically pour, 
then the other two definitions can not be included. And 
if all these words with specific and distinct meanings 



290 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

are definitions of the word baptizo, then no man is bap- 
tized until he passes the three ordeals of immerse, pour 
and sprinkle, which is absurd and ridiculous. Especially 
is this made manifest in the fact that when an object is 
immersed the object is plunged beneath the water; that 
is to say, the subject is applied to the element; whereas, 
when sprinkling or pouring takes place, the water or 
the element is applied to the subject. In immersing, the 
subject is put under the water; in pouring or sprinkling, 
the water is poured upon or sprinkled upon the subject 
with the hand or with some kind of pot. In primitive 
times the people went to the water in order to bury sub- 
jects or candidates in the likeness of Christ's death. In 
modern times the water — a "teenty little" cup full — is 
conveyed to the people! In view of these facts and con- 
trasts we ask, Which is the right way? 

There is not a version of the Scriptures in existence, 
among all the nations, in which the original Greek word 
is translated either pour or sprinkle. No scholar dare 
risk his reputation in so translating the word. In a 
small volume entitled, "Baptism : Its Meaning and Use," 
published by the American Bible Union, the erudite edi- 
tor, Dr. Oonant, has traced out the meaning of the word 
in classic Greek literature, there being some one hundred 
and fifty occurrences of the word in all, and in each 
particular case he shows that the meaning of the word 
is uniformly the same, without one exception. No one, 
so far as we know, has ever attempted to contradict the 
statement of Dr. Couant. He triumphantly shows that 
in every instance it means immerse. Pedobaptist schol- 
ars concede that the word does usually convey this sense 
in classic Greek, while at the same time they assume that 
it sometimes signifies " wash," " die," " stain," etc. But 
it is a significant fact that in classic Greek they never 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. L01 

translate it "pour" or "sprinkle." They also assume 
that in the New Testament it is not used in its classic 
sense. Some Greek lexico is give "wash, " "dye," "stain" 
as meanings of the w T ord, but generally as secondary 
meanings, some of them being so cautious as to say 
that it conveys such meanings only by consequence ; no- 
tably, Bailey, who says that "baptism, in strictness of 
speech, is that kind of washing which consists in dip- 
ping, and when applied to the Christian institution so- 
called, it was used by the primitive Christians in no other 
sense than that of dipping." ("Lex. Theol.," p. 221.) 
A thing immersed may be washed, dyed or stained, as 
a consequence of immersion. "Whether dyed, or washed, 
or stained, depends upon the character of the element 
in which the immersion takes place. By metonymy of 
speech, consequences of an action may be substituted 
for the action itself. In this way frequently the words 
wash, dye, stain, soil, etc., are put for the English word 
dip. As for example, when the dyer dips an article into 
the dye-stuff, it is said he dyes it, when, in exactness of 
language, he dips it, and, as a consequence, it is dyed. 
When, therefore, the washer dips the same article into 
water it is said that he washes it, when, in fact, the ar- 
ticle washed is only a consequence of the dipping in 
water. Shall we, therefore, conclude that wash is the 
meaning of the word dip? By metonymy of speech, a 
person or thing may be said to be immersed, as an effect, 
by being thoroughly drenched in a rain shower. The 
effect is the same as though the person "were immersed. 
In translating words from one language into another, 
the rule is always to translate by the primary meaning 
of the word as given in the lexicons, unless the connec- 
tion makes it necessary to use a word of secondary 
meaning, which has never yet been done in translating 



292 GOSPEL PKINCTPLES. 

the word baptizo. In regard to rules of interpretation, 
Sir William Blackstone, an eminent authority in law 
and jurisprudence, says: "Words of a law are generally 
to be understood in their usual and most known signi- 
fication, not so much regarding the propriety of gram- 
mar as their general and popular use." 

We frequently hear persons say, "If ever I become a 
Christian, I will he immersed.' 1 Why do they say so? 
Because they prefer to take a certainty for an uncertain- 
ty, and because there is no controversy in regard to the 
validity of immersion. As sprinkle and pour have al- 
ways been held in doubt, since they were introduced in 
the apostasy of the Church, wise and conscientious men 
discard the doubtful and choose that which is positively 
true. 

Dean Stanley, one of the great modern lights of the 
Church of England, in tracing out the history and 
meaning of "baptism," says: 

"What, then, was baptism in the apostolic age? It 
coincided with the greatest religious change which the 
world has yet witnessed. Multitudes of men and wo- 
men were seized with one common impulse, and aban- 
doned, by the irresistible conviction of a day, an hour, 
a moment, their former habits, friends, associates, to be 
enrolled in a new society, under the banner of a new 
faith. That new society was intended to be a society 
of ' brothers,' bound by ties closer than any earthly 
brotherhood — filled with life and energy, such as fall to 
the lot of none but the most ardent enthusiasts, yet 
tempered by a moderation, a wisdom and a holiness such 
as enthusiasts have rarely possessed. It was, moreover, 
a society swayed by the presence of men whose words 
even now cause the heart to burn, and by the recent 
recollections of One, whom i not seeing they loved with 






REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 293 

love unspeakable.' Into this society they passed by an 
act as natural as it was expressive. The plunge into 
the bath of purification, long known among the Jewish 
nation as the symbol of a change of life, was still re- 
tained as the pledge of entrance into this new and uni- 
versal communion — retained under the sanction of Him 
into whose name they were by that solemn rite 'baptized.' 
In that early age the scene of the transaction was either 
some deep wayside spring or well, as for the Ethiopian, 
or some rushing river, as the Jordan, or some vast 
reservoir, as at Jericho or Jerusalem, whither, as in the 
baths of Caracalla at Rome, the whole population re- 
sorted for swimming or washing. The water in those 
Eastern regions, so doubly significant of all that was 
pure and refreshing, closed over the heads of the con- 
verts and they rose into the light of heaven new and 
altered beings. It was natural that on such an act were 
lavished all the figures which language could furnish to 
express the mighty change: 'regeneration,' 'illumi- 
nation,' 'burial,' 'resurrection,' 'a new creature,' 'for- 
giveness of sins,' 'salvation.' Well might the apostle 
say, 'Baptism doth even now save us,' even bad he left 
his statement in its unrestricted strength to express 
what in that age no-one could misunderstand. But no 
less well was he led to add, as if with a prescience of 
coming evils, 'Not the putting away the filth of the 
flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God.' " 
The article from which this is quoted appeared in the 
Nineteenth Century for October, 1879, only a short time 
before the author passed on to the final Grand Assize. 
This he pronounces "the apostolic baptism." After 
showing what "was the apostolic baptism," he then 
traces "in detail" "its history through the next three 
centuries," and shows how the ordinance was abused, 



o 



94 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 



liow it was perverted from its original design, and how 
by crafty men it was tortured into an object of super- 
stition. Referring to the " second characteristic of the 
act of baptism," Stanley says in the same article: 

"Baptism was not only a bath, but a plunge — an 
entire submersion in the deep water, a leap as into the 
roiling sea or the rushing river, where for the moment 
the waves closed over the bather's head and he emerges 
again as from a momentary grave ; or it was the shock 
of a shower-bath — the rush of water passed over the 
whole person from capacious vessels, so as to wrap the 
recipient as within the veil of a splashing cataract [Here 
Stanley quotes from Dr. Smith's History of Christain 
Antiquities, vol. i. p. 169 — Ed. Review]. This was the 
part of the ceremony on which the apostles laid so 
much stress. It seemed to them like a burial of the old 
former self and the rising up again of the new self. So 
St. Paul compared it to the Israelites passing through 
the roaring waves of the Red Sea, and St. Peter, to the 
passing through the deep waters of the flood. 'We 
are buried,' said St. Paul, 'with Christ by baptism at 
his death; that like as Christ was raised, thus we also 
should walk in the newness of life.'* Baptism as the 
entrance into the Christian society was a complete change 
from the old superstitions or restrictions of Judaism to 
the freedom and confidence of the gospel. It was a 
complete change from the idolatries and profligacies of 
the old heathen world to the light and purity of Chris- 
tianity. It was a change effected only by the same 
effort and struggle as that with which a strong swimmer 
or an adventurous diver throws himself into the stream 
and struggles with the waves, and comes up with in- 
creased energy out of the depths of the dark abyss." 

* Rom. vi. 4; 1 Cor. x. 2; 2 Pet. iii. 20, 21. 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 295 

Iii all his statements made up to this point, he does 
not give out even an intimation that he believed that 
rantism or affusion — sprinkling or pouring — was prac- 
ticed in the apostolic age. The Dean indulges in a 
good deal of rhetorical vaulting, and plays with tropes 
and figures of speech as a child with a rattle, but his 
testimony is not invalidated by his superfluous language. 
After noting the many changes that took place during 
the apostasy of the Church in the form, design and 
subjects of baptism, the erudite Dean stultifies history, 
philology and his own reasoning powers by what follows: 

We n<»w pass to the change in the form itself. For 
the first thrirteen centuries the almost universal practice 
of baptism was that of which we read in the New Testa- 
ment and which is the very meaning of the word 
" baptize "* — that those who were baptized were plunged, 
submerged, immersed into the water. That practice is 
still, as we have seen, continued in Eastern churches. 
In the Western church it still lingers amongst Roman 
Catholics in the solitary instance of the cathedral of 
Milan, amongst Protestants in the austere sect of the 
Baptists. It lasted long into the Middle Ages. Even 
the Icelanders, who at first shrank from the water of 
their freezing lakes, were reconciled when they found 
that they could use the warm water of the Greysers. 
And the cold climate of Russia has not been found an 
obstacle to its continuance throughout the vast Empire. 
Even in the Church of England it is still observed in 
theory. Elizabeth and Edward the Sixth were both 
immersed. The rubric in the Public Baptism for Infants 
enjoins that, unless for special cases, they are to be 
dipped, not sprinkled. But in practice it gave way 
since the beginning of the seventeenth century. With 
the few exceptions just mentioned, the whole Western 
churches have now substituted for the ancient bath the 
ceremony of sprinkling a few drops of water on the 

* It is also the meaning of the word taufen (" dip "). 

24 



296 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

face. The reason of the change is obvious. The prac- 
tice ot immersion, apostolic and primitive as it was, was 
peculiarly suitable to the Southern and Eastern countries 
for which it was designed, and peculiarly unsuitable to 
the tastes, the convenience and the feelings of the 
countries of the North and West. Not by any decree 
of Council or Parliament, but by the general sentiment 
of Christian liberty, this great change was effected. Not 
beginning till the thirteenth century, it has gradually 
driven the ancient Catholic usage out of the whole of 
Europe. There is no one who would now wish to go 
back to the old practice. It had no doubt the sanction 
of the apostles and of their Master. It had the sanction 
of the venerable churches of the early ages, and of the 
sacred countries of the East. Baptism by sprinkling 
was rejected by the whole ancient church (except in the 
rare case of death-beds or extreme necessity) as no 
baptism at all. Almost the first exception was the 
heretic Novatian. It still has the sanction of the power- 
ful religious community which numbers amongst its 
members such noble characters as John Bunyan, Robert 
Hall and llavelock. In a version of the Bible which 
the Baptist Church has compiled for its own use in 
America, where it excels in numbers all but the Metho- 
dists, it is thought necessary, and on philological grounds 
it is quite correct, to translate John the Baptist by John 
the Immerser. 

Not as an honest historian, not as a faithful philologist, 
not as a profound linguist, and not as a conscientious 
interpreter of God's word, does he assert that " this great 
change ivas effected" " by the general sentiment of Christian 
liberty " but as a churchman — a high churchman at that 
— as a sectarian, as a defender of infant baptism, as an 
apologist for sprinkling and pouring, and as a vindicator 
of "our Church," he makes these bold and indefensible 
and unwarranted declarations. With one sw r eep of his 
pen he places the Church of England — which originated 
with Henry VIII. — above the apostolic Church. Tradi- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 297 

tion above the written word, the authority of councils 
above the authority of Jesus Christ, and "the general 
sentiment of Christian liberty" above the facts of the 
New Testament! And thus these great expounders of 
"Christian liberty" become "blind leaders of the blind." 
If questions of salvation and of eternal life are to be 
decided and regulated by " the general sentiment of Chris- 
tian liberty" then is the Romish Church "just as good 
as any other Church," because, judging by her numerical 
strength and wealth and worldly wisdom, she represents 
more of the "general sentiment of Christian liberty" 
than any other body of religious people. 

Pedobaptists are very much perplexed over the ques- 
tion of baptism. The difficulty meets them at every 
turn, and will not down at their bidding. Lyman 
Abbott, editor of the Christian Union, a man of rare 
ability, and as free of prejudice as sectarianism will 
allow any man to be, in commenting on the recent acts 
of the Baptists in convention at Saratoga, and speaking 
of Judson's Burmese Translation, says: 

There is a scholarly, an acceptable, an actually accepted 
version of Scripture in the language of the Burmese. 
This version is without competition, present or pros- 
pective. It is the Burmese Bible, at least for an indefi- 
nite time to come. The Burmese depend on it, on it 
alone, for their knowledge of the word of God. Such, 
on one side, is the state of the facts. But this Burmese 
version of Scripture renders the Greek word " baptize," 
with its cognates, by a vernacular equivalent meaning 
"immerse." No competent scholar will assert that this 
is an unscholarly rendering of the Greek original. This 
rendering, however, compels the Christian missionaries 
who do not practice immersion, and who, of course, do 
not teach immersion, to explain the terms involved. 
There is for such missionaries an obvious disadvantage 
in this. Still, in spite of the disadvantage, missionaries 
not Baptists do, as matter of fact, use this version, mak- 



298 . GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

ing the necessary explanation. Now the course taken 
by the American Bible Society is to refuse its aid in 
circulating this version of the Scriptures, which stands 
alone as the one means through which many millions of 
human beings may know the word of God and the way 
of salvation. The Bible Society should recede from this 
refusal. Now is an opportune time for it to correct its 
mistake. It can well afford to do so. Indeed, it can 
not afford not to do so. Noblesse oblige. Strength, 
wealth, prestige, involve responsibilities, create obliga- 
tions. 

If the case were no other than it is; if it were a ques- 
tion of antecedent instruction to translators what kind 
of versions to produce, the case might be different. We 
might then say, Let "baptize" be transferred — that is, 
transliterated — into the heathen tongues, not translated 
at all. Missionaries of different views on the suhject of 
baptism could then use one and the same Bible, apply- 
ing their several explanations of the terms transferred. 
This is the course pursued in both the New and Old 
Versions of the Bible, and it is a wise one. But here is 
a version already in existence, already in possession, ex- 
clusive possession. It translates, indeed, instead of 
transliterating; but it translates truly enough so far as 
mere lexicography goes. Nobody can deny that, nobody 
at least whose denial would weigh. Nay, if non- 
Baptist Burmese scholars were to make a new version 
of their own, and in that version translate the terms in 
question, such scholars would not render those terms in 
a manner to contradict the version already existing. The 
utmost that they could do would be to render those 
terms by words or phrases of a general and indeter- 
minate meaning. What would thus be gained? Why, 
against a version that gave what is certainly the general 
meaning of "baptize," there would be a version that 
did not give the meaning of that word at all. That is 
all. Would the gain be sufficient to warrant the Ameri- 
can Bible Society in entering the field with a rival 
version? The Bible Society by its inaction has already 
answered that question. But either do this or do noth- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 299 

ing is the alternative to which the American Bible 
Society is shut up if it refuses to help circulate Dr. 
Judson's Burmese version of Scripture. In this existing 
state of the case what is the duty of the Society seems 
to us very plain. The Society ought not to produce a 
rival version, and it ought not to do nothing. 

The record of God stands fast, and the ordinances of 
God stand fast. And men — whether Papal or Protestant 
— can not remove them nor nullify them, unless they 
reject the word of God and crush down the Bible. And 
that is just what the so-called orthodox churches are 
doing and have been doing. And what is it done for, 
except it be, if possible, to popularize Christianity? 
The question still comes up, as in the days of the prophet 
Malachi, "What profit is there in keeping the ordinances?" 
And to please the people, time-serving preachers and 
priests admit that there is no profit in thus serving 
God. The "covenant of God is broken" and " the 
ordinance is changed" to please a gainsaying world; 
and hence, instead of reforming the world by teaching 
men of the world to fear God and honor his holy law, 
these miserable self-seekers compromise the truth of God 
and sell their souls for a mess of pottage. 

IMMERSION — SPRINKLE — POUR. WHICH ? 

As we are not writing for Greeks and Latins, but for 
English readers — for the "common people" — we shall 
not impose upon our readers by appealing to dead Ian. 
guages of which many of them know comparatively 
nothing, except as we shall take the benefit of the latest 
versions of the New Testament, and as we shall avail 
ourselves of the benefits of some criticisms made by the 
best scholars of modern times. King James' Version, 
supplemented by the American New Revision, is plain 



300 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

enough for any ordinary man who is not a bigoted secta- 
rian, nor a Pharisee of the deepest dye. Children who 
read the New Testament with minds unbiased, and illit- 
erate negroes who hear the New Testament read aloud, 
never understand the word baptize as meaning either 
sprinkle or pour. The writer was sprinkled in infancy, 
and brought up in the Lutheran faith, and yet, during 
all this time, when reading the New Testament, he al- 
ways believed in immersion as it reads in the apostolic 
commission and in parallel passages. It is our firm con- 
viction that any rational man who reads the plain state- 
ments of Scripture, and then rejects immersion and sub- 
stitutes sprinkle or pour, is morally dishonest, or does 
not believe the word of God as an inspired revelation. 
Let us recite a few passages. 

"In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in 
the wilderness of Judea." (Matt. iii. 1.) JBaptistees is 
the Greek of Baptist, and means "he who immerses." 
The passage never has, in any language, been translated 
either sprinkle or pour. 

"Then went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea, and 
all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized 
of him in Jordan, confessing their sins." (Matt. iii. 5, 
6.) If in the phrases, a in Jordan" — "in the river Jor- 
dan" — any one can, by stretch of the imagination, dis- 
cover the idea of sprinkle, he is certainly beyond the 
pale of reason. 

"I indeed baptize you with water (en hudati — in water), 
but he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit" (en pneii 
ynati hagio — in the Holy Spirit, which actually took place 
on the day of Pentecost). (Mark i. 8.) The same Greek 
preposition is found in these passages: " In the wilder- 
ness — "in Jordan" — "in Bethlehem," and in very many 
other similar phrases in the New Testament. The Amer- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. oOl 

lean New Revision renders the passage just quoted, a in 
water," and "in the Holy Spirit;" and the English 
(Canterbur}') Revision gives it that meaniug in the mar- 
gin of their work — a fact that forever annihilates all the 
petty quibbles of pedobaptists. The American revisers 
translate Matt. iii. 11, as follows: 

"I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but 
he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes 
I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the 
Holy Spirit and in lire." Let it be distinctly noted that 
the American Revision is a pedobaptist work. This 
verse has been the puzzle, and the hiding-place, and the 
bamboozle of pedobaptists for the last fifty years. So 
far as this verse is concerned, their occupation is now 
gone. The great Lutheran commentator, Lange, a man 
of acknowledged scholarship, translates Matt. iii. 11 
thus: "I indeed baptize you in (en) water, immersing 
you in the element of water, unto repentance." Let it 
be understood that baptism is not water, but that it is an 
act of faith — an act of obedience — whether the act takes 
place in water, or in some other fluid. Christ command- 
ed the act to be done in water. Let us follow the rec- 
ord. 

"And it came to pass in those days that Jesus came 
. . . and was baptized of John in Jordan, and straight- 
way coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens open- 
ed." (Mark i. 9,10.) How men can predicate sprinkle 
of such phrases as "in water" — "in Jordan" — "up out 
of the water," is a problem in ethics never understood 
by the writers of the JSTew Testament. Such casuistry 
is worthy of the age of the mystics. 

"And John also was baptizing in ^Enon, near Salim, 
because there was much water there : and they came and 
were baptized." (John iii. 23. ) John went where there 



OK,J> GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

was much water, or many streams, for the specific pur- 
pose of immersing the people, and not to water camels, 
and to assuage the thirst of the multitude. Neither the 
word "baptized" nor the circumstances denote or call 
to mind the idea of sprinkle or pour. These last two 
words are not in the premises. 

"And as they went on their way, they came unto a 
certain water, . . . and they went down both into 
the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized 
him." (Acts viii. 36-38.) It will be noted that the 
parties first came to the water, then they went down into 
the water, and, having gone down into the water, then 
Philip immersed the eunuch. The idea of coming to 
the water, and then descending into the water, in order 
to sprinkle water upon the eunuch, is simply absurd as 
well as ludicrous. "A certain water," means one among 
a number of streams. By reference to Colman's " Map 
of the Holy Land" (a Presbyterian production), it will 
be seen that several rivers, emptying into the Mediter- 
ranean Sea, have their course in this part of the coun- 
try. Now let us turn to the Epistles, and note how the 
allusions to baptism in them correspond with the prac- 
tice of John, Christ and the apostles. 

"Or are ye ignorant that all who were baptized into 
Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We are 
buried, therefore, with him through baptism into death: 
that like as Christ was raised from the dead through 
the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in new- 
ness of life." (Rom. vi. 3, 4.) 

"Having been buried with him in baptism, wherein 
ye were also raised with him through faith in the work- 
ing of God, who raised him from the dead." (Col. ii. 
12.) We have quoted from the American Revised Ver- 
sion. In all our researches we have never found one 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 103 

man of distinction who has denied that "buried" in 
both these passages refers to the ordinance of immer- 
sion, as practiced in the apostolic age; but, on the other 
hand, it is an indisputable fact that all lexicographers, 
commentators, reformers, historians, annotators and an- 
tiquarians affirm that these passages refer to immersion. 
Conybeare and Howson, both eminent critics in the 
Church of England, in the work entitled the Life and 
Epistles of Paul, translate thus: "With him, therefore, 
we were buried by baptism, wherein we shared his death 
when we sank beneath the waters." To which this foot- 
note is appended: "This clause, which is here left ellip- 
tical, is fully expressed in Col. ii. 12. This passage can not 
be understood unless it be borne in mind that the primi- 
tive baptism was by immersion." (Life and Epistles of 
Paul, Vol. II. , p. 169.) These same distinguished biblical 
scholars thus again speak of baptism: 

It is needless to add that baptism was (unless in ex- 
ceptional cases) administered by immersion, the convert 
being plunged beneath the surface of the wr.ter to repre- 
sent his death to the life of sin, and then raised from 
this momentary burial to represent his resurrection to 
the life of righteousness. It must be a subject of regret 
that the general discontinuance of this original form of 
baptism (though perhaps necessary in our northern cli- 
mates) has rendered obscure to popular apprehensions 
some very important passages of Scripture. (Vol. I., 
p. 439.) 

Speaking of the conversion of Lydia, these authors 
say: 

Lydia, being convinced that Jesus was the Messiah, 
and having made a profession of her faith, was forthwith 
baptized. The place of her baptism was doubtless the 
stream which flowed by the proseucha. The waters of 
Europe were "sanctified to the mystical washing away 
of sin." With the baptism of Lydia that of her u house- 
25 



304 



GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 



hold" was associated. Whether we are to understand 
by this term her children, her slaves, or the work-people 
engaged in the manual employment connected with her 
trade, can not easily he decided. (Life and Epistles of 
Paul, Vol I., p. 296.) 

In a foot-note they remark as follows : " Meyer thinks 
they were female assistants in the business connected 
with her trade. It is well known that this is one of the 
passages often adduced in the controversy concerning 
infant baptism. We need not urge this view of it; for 
belief that infant baptism is 'most agreeable with the 
institution of Christ 7 does not rest on this text." Italics 
ours. 

Though these men, as the exponents of orthodoxy, 
and as prominent ecclesiastics in the Church of England, 
show amazing inconsistency by practicing what is not 
sustained by the word of God, and by practicing in the 
Church of England what was never practiced in the 
apostolic church; yet their testimony in regard to the 
literature of the New Testament, and their critical 
knowledge of the ancient languages, outweigh, in the 
court of public investigation, the smatterings and quib- 
bles and cavilings of all the little sectarian pettifoggers 
of all the orthodox churches. Below we present the 
testimonies of some of the most celebrated church his- 
torians. 

Moshiem, Ec. Hist. 1-87, says : 

In this (the first) century baptism was administered in 
convenient places, without the public assemblies, and by 
immersing the candidate wholly in water. 

In Stanley's History of. the Eastern Church we have 
this language: 

There can be no question that the original form of 
baptism — the very meaning of the word — was complete 
immersion in the deep baptismal waters; and that, for 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. oOo 

at least four centuries, any other form was either un- 
known, or regarded, unless in the case of dangerous ill- 
ness, as an exceptional, almost a monstrous case. To 
this form the Eastern Church still rigidly adheres. 

Philip Sehafi, in his History of the Apostolic Church, 

says: 

Indeed, some would not allow even this baptismas 
clinicorum {baptism of the sick), as it was called, to be 
valid baptism, and Cyprian himself, in the third century, 
ventured to defend the aspersio only in case of a neces- 
sitas cogens, and with reference to a special indulgentia 
Dei (ep. 76 Magna). There were ecclesiastical laws 
which made persons baptized by sprinkling ineligible to 
church offices. . . . Not till the end of the thirteenth 
century did sprinkling become the rule and immersion 
the exception. 

In the American Cyclopedia we have these words: 
The form of baptism at first was, according to most 
historians, by immersion; but as Christianity advanced 
into colder climates, the more convenient mode of sprink- 
ling was introduced. 

All these are pedobaptists. Mosheim was a member 
of the Evangelical Lutheran Church; Dean Stanley 
was a member of the Church of England, and Schaff is 
a member of the Reformed (German) Church. But, 
like the Pope of Rome, the little Popes of the Protestant 
Church have assumed to "change" the ordinance of 
Jesus Christ. For instance, the following from John 
Calvin : 

But whether the person who is baptized be wholly 
immersed, and whether thrice or once, or whether water 
be only poured or sprinkled upon him, is of no import- 
ance. Churches ought to be left at liberty, in this re- 
spect, to act according to the difference of countries. The 
very word baptize, however, signifies to immerse; and it 
is certain that immersion was the practice of the ancient 
Church. {Christian Institute, Chap. XV.) 



306 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

And this from Luther: 

First, the name baptism is Greek ; in Latin it can be 
rendered immersion, when we immerse anything into 
water, that it may be all covered with water. And al- 
though that custom has now grown out of use with most 
persons (nor do they wholly submerge children, but only 
pour on a little water), yet they ought to be entirely 
immersed and immediately drawn out. For this the 
etymology of the word seems to demand. (Luther on 
the Sacrament of Baptism.) 

In the Douay Bible (Romish translation), which con- 
tains Haddock's Notes, and especially approved by Pope 
Pius IX., with the sanction of many archbishops, we 
find the following confession: 

Baptized. — The word baptism signifies a washing, par- 
ticularly when it is done by immersion or by dipping or 
plunging a thing under water, which was formerly the 
ordinary w r ay of administering the sacrament of baptism. 
But the Church, which can not change the least article 
of the Christian faith, is not tied up in matters of disci- 
pline and ceremonies. Not only the Catholic Church, but 
also the pretended Reformed Churches have altered this 
primitive custom in giving the sacrament of baptism, and 
now allow of baptism by pouring or sprinkling water 
upon the person baptized. 

With such authorities as these, what further need 
have we of testimony? The practical question still re- 
mains: Shall we honor an institution of Jesus the Christ, 
which, besides the testimonies of the Scriptures, has the 
unequivocal approval of all scholars and all eminent 
men, or shall we practice a thing that rests entirely upon 
tradition and assumption ? 

THE HOLY SPIRIT. 

God made promise in the gospel that the Holy Spirit 
should remain in the Church of Christ forever. The 
Spirit of God comes to the world and to the Church as a 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. CC7 

promise, not as a command, and not in answer to prayer. 
What God promises, he fulfills. When religious zealots 
pray God, and sometimes even command him, "to send 
down the Holy Spirit," they perform a thing that has 
no warrant in the Word of God. It looks like great ir- 
reverence, and betrays a wonderful ignorance of the 
mind of the Scriptures, to see men asking God to "send 
down" the Holy Spirit periodically, or as occasion may 
demand, or when sensational preachers are in a humor 
to get up a "big meeting," when, at the same time, the 
Spirit of God is ever present in his Church. When we 
read, "The Spirit and the Bride say, Come," is not that 
always in the present tense — ever present and never ab- 
sent? When Christ said to his disciples that the Father 
would send them another Comforter (John xiv. 16), even 
the Spirit of truth, that he might abide with them and 
with the disciples of Christ forever, why irreverently and 
stupidly pray for that which we already possess? The 
Holy Spirit is ever present with the Word, as God and 
Christ are ever present in the Word. Some preachers 
act as though the Spirit of God, the greater part of the 
time, was roaming in infinite space, and that the Spirit 
made periodical visits to the earth, whenever some fanatic 
proposed to besiege the dominions of darkness. 

God, in the beginning, revealed truth ; Christ, as the 
Son of God, revealed the truth; the Holy Spirit con- 
firmed the truth revealed; and these three agree in one 
— agree in character, agree in purpose, agree in action. 
God reveals law; Christ executes the law; the Holy 
Spirit confirms and gives finality to the law. In this, 
we have the legislative, the executive and the judicial. 
The apostles did not preach the Holy Spirit, but they 
preached as the Spirit gave them utterance — preached 
"Christ and him crucified," infallibly guided by the 



£08 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

Spirit. It is not the mechanical operations of the Spirit 
that change the moral nature of man, but it is the truth, 
as revealed by the Spirit — the truth being brought in 
contact with the mind and conscience of the sinner. 
We do not intend to discuss the possibilities and limit- 
ations of the Holy Spirit, but simply the sublime truths 
revealed by the Spirit. What the Spirit of God has 
power to do in the vast universe, above and beyond the 
revealed truth, we know not, nor is it our business to 
pry into the mysteries of the great Creator; but it is 
our privilege to harmonize and preach the truth which 
the Spirit has revealed. We shall scripturally analyze 
the following propositions: 

(a) The baptism of the Holy Spirit. 

(b) The impartation of the Holy Spirit by the impo- 
sition of apostolic hands. 

(c) The gospel or the word as revealed by the Spirit. 

(d) The confirmation of the word by attestations of 
miraculous power. 

(e) The relation of the Spirit to the sinner. 

(/) The relation of the Spirit to the child of God. 

(g) The gift of the Spirit. 

(h) Who quench the Spirit? 

(i) Resisting the Spirit. 

(j) The witness of the Spirit. 

(k) The fruits of the Spirit. 

(I) Personality of the Spirit. 

There are only two cases on record of a visible bap- 
tism in the Holy Spirit, viz : the one which occurred on 
the day of Pentecost, w T hen the gospel, in fact, for the 
first time was offered to the Jews, in the name of our 
risen Lord; and the one which took place in the house 
of Cornelius, at Csesarea, when, for the first time, the 
gospel, in fact, was proclaimed to the Gentile world by 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 309 

the apostle Peter, who, with the "keys of the kingdom" 
of God as the first of the apostles in authority, but not 
above the other apostles in authority, opened the king- 
dom to both Jew and Gentile. (Acts, chapters ii. and x.) 
In both these places the gospel was introduced by visible 
miraculous manifestations, in harmony with the fact that 
in the inauguration of any new order of things, whether 
physical or religious, the Almighty made use of extra- 
ordinary power; but that, after the inauguration of the 
special order, by supernatural power, the Lord subse- 
quently employed ordinary means in the accomplish- 
ment of his will. Spiritual creation is analogous to 
physical creation. In the physical creation, God created 
the first man a perfect man in stature, and not a babe 
in stature. Subsequent to that, every human being, 
including the Son of Mary, came up from babyhood, 
according to the laws of procreation. The first animal 
of every species, and the first bird of every species, and 
the fi ! si fish of every species, and the first flower of every 
species, was each made perfect according to its nature. 
After that, everything in the physical world must be 
reproduced through the medium of the seminal princi- 
ple. The giving of the Ten Commandments on Mount 
Sinai by Moses, was through the interposition of a mir- 
acle. After this revelation, the Jewish people, in their 
religious worship and moral conduct, were to be edu- 
cated and regulated by the precepts and principles which 
the constitution of the Jewish theocracy contained. 
Analogous to this was the Gospel Dispensation. To 
miraculously reveal the gospel was one thing; to induce 
the human family to live by its spiritual precepts and 
its moral power, is another thing. The law of Moses 
miraculously came down from Mount Sinai; "the law 
of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, which makes us 



310 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

free from the law of sin and death," came down mirac- 
ulously from Mount Zion. 

Certain results followed the baptism of the Spirit 
in the two cases mentioned: 1. A sound came from 
heaven like the rushing of a mighty wind. 2. What- 
ever that sound was, or the particular thing that pro- 
duced the sound, it filled the room where the apostles 
were waiting the fulfillment of the promise of the Father. 

3. Cloven or parted tongues, resembling fire, rested upon 
the heads of the apostles, symbolic of the fact that God 
intended to make use of human tongues in the dissem- 
ination of the glad tidings of salvation. Paul says (2 
Cor. iv. 7): "We have this treasure [the preaching of 
the gospel] in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the 
power may be of God, and not of us" — the apostles. 

4. The apostles were empowered by the guidance of the 
Spirit to speak in every tongue of the wonderful works 
of God. 

On the self-evident principle that like causes, under 
like circumstances, produce like effects, we have this to 
say, that if any one in these modern times pretends to 
have been immersed in the Holy Spirit as were the apos- 
tles of Jesus Christ, he must produce the same creden- 
tials as those which appertained to the apostles. He 
must give assurance that at the time of his immersion 
in the Holy Spirit, there was (1) heard the rushing of a 
mighty wind coming down out of heaven ; (2) that parted 
tongues as of fire stood upon his head; (3) that the house 
was filled with an unearthly sound, and (4) that he can 
speak in every man's tongue the gospel of Christ, with- 
out having learned the languages of all the tribes of the 
earth. Unless he can present such credentials as these, 
he is self-deceived as well as a deceiver of others. 

The strange phenomenon which on- the day of Pente- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 811 

cost and in the house of Cornelius resembled fire, was 
but a manifestation of the presence of God; as was the 
fire that came down from heaven and licked up the first 
sacrifice upon the first altar reared by the command of 
Jehovah; as was the flaming sword placed at the en- 
trance of the garden of Eden after the expulsion of 
Adam and Eve; as was the burning bush as seen by 
Moses in the land of Midian; as was also the shekinah 
in the most holy place of the tabernacle and temple 
worship of the Jews. When preachers, ignorant of the 
word of God — and sometimes willfully ignorant — call 
upon God to baptize the people "with the Holy Ghost 
and with fire," they do not seem to be aware of the 
fact that, since the organization of human society, and 
through all the generations of men, God has used fire 
as a symbol of his vengeance upon wicked nations, upon 
wicked families, and upon wicked individuals. When 
John the Baptist spoke of baptism in the Holy Spirit 
and in fire, he was addressing two distinct classes of men 
— the believing and the unbelieving, the righteous and 
the unrighteous. (Matt. iii. 11.) This statement is 
made clear by the fact that when Christ told his apos- 
tles that they " should be baptized in the Holy Spirit 
not many days hence,'' he said nothing about a "baptism 
in fire," for the reason that he was addressing only be- 
lievers, and not unbelievers, as in the case of John, who 
had both classes before him. (See Acts i. 5.) 

The apostles received the miraculous endowment of 
the Holy Spirit as the fulfillment of a special promise 
made by the Savior to them, but to no one else. Joel, 
the prophet, as well as John the Baptist, in general terms 
and in a certain sense, spoke of all nations as coming 
under the influence of the Spirit, just as, in a general 
sense, all families were to be blessed in Christ, or by the 



812 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

gracious influences of his gospel, according to the prom- 
ise which God made to Abraham, or as quoted by Paul 
in these words (Gal. iii. 8) : "And the Scripture, fore- 
seeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, 
preached before the gospel to Abraham, saying: In thee 
shall all nations be blessed." But after Christ selects 
his apostles and educates them, and in anticipation of 
fitting them to carry out the great commission, he tells 
them, in specific terms, that they, as his accredited wit- 
nesses and embassadors, shall " receive the promise of 
the Father," and be endowed "with power from above." 
This promise Christ never made to the promiscuous 
multitude. There must be a limit somewhere, and 
Christ himself defines the limit: because if we embrace 
all mankind under the term "all flesh," as becoming 
recipients of the baptism of the Spirit, the proposition 
would include all sorts of men — believers, infidels and 
scoffers, and therefore, in proving too much, it would 
prove nothing. 

THE BAPTISM IN THE SPIRIT. 

It is one of the distinct offices of the Spirit to reveal 
the truth — not ordinary truth, which belongs to matter 
and force, but spiritual truth, which is horn in heaven. 
In the city of Jerusalem, on the eventful day of Pente- 
cost, when it was noised abroad that the apostles were 
speaking, in every man's tongue, the wonderful works 
of God, "as the Spirit gave them utterance," then "the 
multitude came together," and the multitude were "trou- 
bled in mind, because that every man had heard them 
speak in his own language." Here it is plainly seen 
that the multitude were not present to receive the en- 
dowment of the Holy Spirit, as the apostles received it. 
Christ never promised to immerse the "multitude" in 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 313 

the Holy Spirit, neither on the day of Pentecost nor on 
any subsequent period. 

Christ, in his special charge to his apostles, says : 
"Nevertheless, I tell you the truth. It is expedient for 
you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter 
will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send him to 
you. And when he [not it] is come, he will convince 
the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment'' 
— not convince the world by a direct agency, but through 
the medium of the apostles. (John xvi. 7, 8.) On the 
day of Pentecost, after "the multitude came together," 
the apostle Peter, standing up with the eleven, and 
speaking as the Spirit gave him utterance, without any 
thought upon his part, preached the good news of sal- 
vation to the assembled people, who, after being pierced 
to the heart by the words of truth uttered, cried out in 
great distress of mind, " Men and brethren, what must 
we do?" The answer to this will be given in another 
place. 

We now come to the second case of the immersion in 
the Holy Spirit, that of the household of Cornelius, as 
recorded in the tenth and eleventh chapters of Acts of 
Apostles. Peter, in referring to the case of Cornelius 
and his house, after the immersion in the Spirit had 
taken place, in his rehearsal of the great event before 
his Jewish brethren, said: "And as I began to speak 
[began to preach the gospel], the Holy Spirit fell on 
them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I 
the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed 
baptized in [en] water, but you shall be baptized in [en] 
the Holy Spirit." The word of the Lord, under the 
reign of Christ, and therefore under the New Covenant, 
was first to be proclaimed in Jerusalem, as the beginning 
place. (See Isaiah ii. and Luke xxiv.) The Jewish 



14 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

brethren, who accompanied Peter to Ceeserea as wit- 
nesses, u were astonished, because that on the Gentiles 
also was poured out the gift of the Holy Spirit. For 
they heard them [the first Gentile converts] speak with 
tongues and magnify God" — as the direct effect of this 
remarkable endowment. Peter, in his apology before 
bis Jewish brethren, says: "Forasmuch then, as God 
gave them the like gift as he did unto us [apostles], who 
believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I 
could withstand God?" In those days of miracles, we 
must be careful to discriminate between the recipient of 
miraculous power and the recipient of the remission of 
sins through obedience to the gospel; for, in the case 
before us, we see that after the Holy Spirit "fell on all 
them who heard the word," Peter said, " Can any man 
forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have 
received the Holy Spirit as well as we? " God evidently 
intended by this special miracle to convince the Jews 
that the "middle wall of partition" between Jews and 
Gentiles was now to be broken down, and that the boon 
of salvation through the gospel was also to be granted 
to the Gentiles. 

From these facts, as well as from collateral testimony 
we learn that the purpose of the immersion of certain 
characters in the Holy Spirit was not to change the 
moral nature of those persons, but that, as expressed in 
the language of Paul, tongues (the miraculous use of 
language) are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to 
them who believe not. (1 Cor. xiv. 22.) But "the 
gospel," as revealed by the Holy Spirit, "is the power 
of God unto salvation to them who believe " and obey. 
(Rom. i. 16.) God performed many miracles in the 
presence of Pharaoh, to give that hard and inexorable 
despot to understand that the Lord, by whom Moses 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. S15 

was sent, was the Jehovah — the I Am that I Am — of the 
Israelites. Aaron's rod, metamorphosed into a serpent, 
swallowed up the rods of the Egyptian magicians, whose 
rods of divination also hecame serpents. But in that 
miraculous display of power there was nothing to change 
the moral character of the witnesses. The inspiration 
of the dumb beast on which Balaam, the heathen prophet, 
rode, and which brute beast rebuked the false prophet, 
did not affect the moral condition of that distinguished 
animal. Nor, so far as the facts are revealed to us, was 
the moral character of the prophet himself changed, 
who, mechanically guided by the Spirit of God, pro- 
nounced the richest of blessings upon the Israelites. 
The Corinthian Church possessed more gifts of working 
miracles than any church mentioned in the New Testa- 
ment, and yet this church, above all the churches founded 
by the apostles, was the proudest and most corrupt, and 
one which was full of disorder and discontent, and 
against which Paul files no less than six distinct charges 
of immorality — all of which forcible facts go to show 
that inspiration does not by itself, as a mechanical 
agency of God, change the moral nature of man, nor 
the will-power of man. The Lord, as it were, dipped 
the apostles in a flood of inspiration, as men dip pens in 
ink, that by them, as pens in his hand, he might write 
upon the "fleshy tablets of the heart" "the law of the 
Spirit of life in Christ Jesus." Paul writes to the 
Corinthians : n Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, 
known and read of all men; forasmuch as you are 
manifestly declared to be the epistles of Christ ministered 
by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the 
living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables 
of the heart." (2 Cor. iii. 3; Rom. viii. 2.) Here, 
figuratively, we have the pen, the ink and the written 



316 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

words: and the written or revealed words contain or 
convey the glad tidings of salvation. 

IMPARTATION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT BY APOSTOLIC HANDS. 

After his resurrection, and just before his ascension, 
Christ thus addressed the apostles: "But wait [at Jeru- 
salem] for the promise of the Father, which," said he, 
"you have heard of me. For John truly baptized in 
water, but you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not 
many days hence." (Acts i. 4, 5.) 

After rebuking some of the apostles for their unbelief, 
because they refused to believe that he had risen from 
the dead, thus Christ addresses them in connection with 
the Great Commission: "And these signs shall follow 
them that believe — In my name they shall cast out 
demons, they shall speak with new tongues, they shall 
take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing it 
shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, 
and they shall recover." (Mark xvi. 17, 18.) 

The subsequent history of the apostles shows con- 
clusively that all these instructions of the Savior had 
direct reference to the miracles that should be wrought 
by the apostles and by those persons upon whom they 
should lay apostolic hands. Of course the apostles 
could lay hands upon a third party and the third party 
could perform miracles, as in the Corinthian Church; 
but it stands nowhere recorded that the power of work- 
ing miracles ever transcended the third party; so that 
when the apostles left the stage of action, all this ex- 
traordinary power ceased entirely. Paul explicitly told 
the church at Corinth that prophecies should cease, and 
that speaking in other tongues and interpreting myster- 
ies should vanish away; but, said he, "I show you a 
more excellent way" than working miracles; and that 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 317 

way is "faith that works by love." (See 1 Cor. chapters 
xii. and xiii.) 

The imposition of apostolic hands was uniformly, if 
not invariably, attended by the working of miracles, and 
the act had no necessary connection with the remission 
of sins, which was alone effected by obedience to the 
gospel, or "the obedience of the faith." It is said of 
Stephen, after he had, in common with others, received 
the laying on of apostolic hands: "And Stephen, full 
of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles 
among the people." (Acts vi. 8.) "jN"ow when the 
apostles, who were at Jerusalem, heard that Samaria 
had received the word of God, they sent them Peter and 
John; who, when they were come down, prayed for 
them and they received the Holy Spirit. . , .. Then 
laid they their hand on them and they received the Holy 
Spirit." (Acts viii. 14-17.) Here we see that after the 
apostles had received the Holy Spirit, as a miraculous 
endowment, they had power to impart the same miracu- 
lous gift to others. In the case of Cornelius the miracle 
occurred before baptism in water; in this case — in the 
case of the Samaritans — the miracle occurred after baptism 
in water; facts which go to show that God worked 
miracles in the days of the apostles when and where he 
pleased, without reference to the personal obedience of 
the sinner. Paul could not work miracles until he re- 
ceived the Holy Spirit. "And Ananias w T ent his way 
[especially directed by the Lord] and entered into the 
house; and putting his hands upon him, said, Brother 
Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, who appeared to thee in the 
way, as thou earnest, hast sent me, that thou mightest 
receive thy sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit." 
(Acts ix. 15-17.) Here, again, baptism in water took 
place after the miracle of the Holy Spirit; for after Paul 



318 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

had received sight (being physically blind) he "arose 
and was baptized." 

When Paul came to Ephesus he found certain disciples 
of John — probably converts of Apollos — to whom he 
thus spoke: "Have you received the Holy Spirit since 
you believed? And they said to him, We have not so 
much as heard whether there be any Holy Spirit. And 
he said to them, Unto what, then, were you baptized? 
And they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul, 
John indeed baptized with the baptism of repentance, 
saying to the people that they should believe on him 
who should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. 
When they heard this they were baptized in the name 
of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands 
upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and and they 
spake with tongues and prophesied" — as a direct result of 
this miraculous impartation. (Acts xix.) Here the 
miracle occurred after the baptism in water. Paul him- 
self had been miraculously called to be an apostle, that 
he might testify to the resurrection of Jesus the Christ, 
having both seen his glorified person and heard the 
voice of his mouth; but, in the meantime, in order to 
obtain the remission of his sins, he was obliged to do 
then what every sinner must do now. (Acts ix., xxii.) 

If only religious teachers could see and appreciate 
this highly important distinction between the ordinary 
and the extraordinary — between what officially belongs 
to the apostles and what belongs to uninspired men, 
w T hat a vast amount of mental perplexity and theological 
confusion and useless speculation might be saved. Why 
do not men discriminate between the age of miracles 
and the age in which we now live? If we, indeed, have 
indicated to us in " the gospel of our salvation" a "more 
excellent way''' than the working of miracles, let us dis- 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. C19 

miss from our minds the idea of miraculous interposi- 
tion, as having no direct connection with our own 
personal salvation, and let us, as wise and pradent men, 
abide the order of heaven. God reveals the truth; we 
obey the truth. God reveals our Savior; we believe 
Christ to be the Son of God, and submit to the condi- 
tions of salvation. 

THE WORD AS REVEALED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT. 

We know nothing of the secret counsels of God. We 
know nothing of unrevealed truth. But Paul says that 
a the mystery which has been hid from ages and from 
generations" is "now made manifest to his saints; to 
whom God would make known what is the riches of 
the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is 
Christ in [among] you, the hope of glory." (Col. i. 26, 
27.) Paul, in the close of his epistle to the Romans, 
says: "Now to him who is able to establish you accord- 
ing to my gospel, and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, 
according to the revelation of the secret, concealed in 
the times of the ages (but is now made manifest by the 
prophetic writings, and by the commandment of the 
eternal God is made known to all the Gentiles, in order 
to the obedience of faith) to the wise God alone, through 
Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory forever." (Rom. 
xvi. 25, 26, Macknight's translation. ) Again to the Ephe- 
sians, Paul writes: "For this reason, I, Paul, the pris- 
oner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, if, indeed, you 
have heard of the administration of the favor of God, 
which was given me for you, that by revelation the se- 
cret was made known to me . . . which in former 
ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it is 
now revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. 
, . . To me, the least of all saints, was this favor given, 



320 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

to publish among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches 
of Christ; and to make all see what is the administra- 
tion of the secret, which had been hid from the ages by 
God who created all things." (Eph. iii. 1-9, Macknight's 
translation.) 

By these and parallel passages, it will be seen that it 
was the office of the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth, 
and, in revealing the truth, to make known the plan of 
salvation. The Savior thus addressed himself to his 
apostles: il Nevertheless, I tell ypu the truth; it is expe- 
dient [or good] for you that I go away ; for if I go not 
away, the Comforter will not come to you; but if I de- 
part, I will send him to you. And when he is come, he 
will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and 
of judgment; of sin, because they believe not on me; of 
righteousness, because I go to my Father, and you see 
me no more; of judgment, because the Prince of this 
world is judged." (John xvi. 7-11.) 

By this testimony we learn that the Holy Spirit re- 
vealed the plan of salvation to the sinner; and, by the 
power of gospel truth, we also learn, that the sinner 
would be converted to Christ. There is not the least 
intimation here of a special, direct, mystic operation 
upon the mind of the sinner; but, on the contrary, the 
language clearly indicates that the testimony of the Scrip- 
tures — the facts of the gospel — were intended to bear 
upon the understanding and conscience of the sinner, 
in order to the illumination of his mind, in order to 
convict him of sin, and also to make known to him the 
conditions of salvation. On the day of Pentecost the 
apostles spake as the Spirit gave them utterance. The 
tongue of the apostle Peter was guided by inspiration. 
An ungodly multitude — the "betrayers and murderers" 
of Jesus Christ — stood transfixed before the apostle. 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. Ill 

He gave utterance to truth that caused the people to 
tremble with fear. He used human speech in conveying 
the truth to the hearts of the paralyzed people. The 
truth conveyed to their hearts was divine truth — the 
moral power of God. Three thousand were pierced to 
the heart by the words spoken. And being convicted by 
the words spoken, they cried out, " Men and brethren, 
what shall we do?" The answer of the apostle was 
direct: "Repent, and be immersed every one of you in 
the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and 
you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts ii.) 
This gift of the Holy Spirit we shall notice under the 
same head further on. 

We quote the language of Christ again: "If you love 
me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the 
Father, and he shall give you [apostles] another Com- 
forter [the Paraclete], that he may abide with you for- 
ever; even the Spirit of truth; whom the world can not 
receive, because it sees him not, neither knows him; but 
you [apostles] know him, for he dwells with you, and 
shall be in you." (John xiv. 15-17.) Again: "But 
when the Comforter is come, whom I will send to you 
[apostles] from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which 
proceeds from the Father, he shall testify of me (by 
means of language), and you shall also bear witness 
[testimony], because you have been with me from the 
beginning." (John xv. 26, 27.) From these utterances 
of Christ we discover that the relation which the Holy 
Spirit sustained to the apostles, and, we might say, to 
Christians, was entirely different from that which he 
sustained to the unregenerate world. Here it is posi- 
tively asserted that the world can not receive the Holy 
Spirit in the same sense in which the apostles received 
him, and as the children of God receive him. But, for 



•322 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

the enlightenment and conviction of the sinner, the 
Holy Spirit reveals the truth, presents the arguments of 
Scripture, and brings to bear the motive power of the 
gospel. The Spirit is the agent, and the word revealed 
is the instrument — the sword of the Spirit — whether 
wielded by apostles, evangelists, preachers or common 
disciples of Christ. And all this convicting power, as 
was manifested everywhere, in all the preaching of the 
apostles, was clothed in human language, through which 
medium alone the truth was communicated to the hearts 
of sinners. We dare not presume to limit the range 
and the power of the Holy Spirit; nevertheless, we are 
only authorized to proclaim to the world that which the 
Spirit of God has clearly revealed. "Revealed things 
belong to us and to our children ; but secret things be- 
long to God," and hence we dare not "rush in where 
angels fear to tread." Paul distinctly informs us that 
the Lord had committed the preaching of the gospel to 
"earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may 
be of God, and not of us." The Holy Spirit revealed 
the message of salvation, but the message was to be 
borne to men by men. Hence Paul inquires: "How then 
shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? 
And how shall they believe in him of whom they have 
not heard? And how shall they hear without a preach- 
er? And how shall they preach, except they be sent?" 
("Rom. x. 14, 15.) This one passage itself is sufficient 
forever to exclude the idea of an abstract operation of 
the Spirit on the sinner's heart. 

But, if possible, to render this proposition still more 
explicit and conclusive we quote the language of Christ 
again : " These things have I spoken to you [the apos- 
tles], being yet present with you; but the Comforter, 
which is the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. S-3 

my name, he shall teach you all things, anu bring all 
things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said to 
you." Again: " Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, 
is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not 
speak of himself [independently of, and contrary to the 
mind of the Father and the Son], but whatever he shall 
hear, that shall he speak: and he shall show you things 
to come." (John xiv. 26; xvi. 13.) If these apostles 
testified, they testified with their lips ; aud if they used 
their lips, they made use of language; and if they used 
language, this language, as the vehicle of inspired ideas, 
conveyed the glad tidings of salvation to the world. 

On the day of Pentecost, when the apostles received 
"the promise of the Father" — the endowment of the 
Holy Spirit — "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ 
Jesus, which makes us free from the law of sin and 
death," was revealed; and this "law of the Spirit," 
which is " the gospel of our salvation," superseded the 
law of Moses — the law of condemnation, "the letter 
that kills." (Rom. viii.) In this "law of the Spirit," 
which is variously represented by the apostle as "the 
gospel," the "law of liberty," the "law of faith," etc., 
the conditions of salvation are found, as everywhere 
proclaimed in the apostolic age. If, in the conversion 
of a sinner, there is a power above and beyond the re- 
vealed truth necessary to intensify and consummate the 
process of the new creation in the image of Christ, the 
knowledge of such a fact is not recorded upon the pages 
of inspiration. When Paul emphatically declares that 
"the gospel is the power of God unto [or, in order to] 
salvation," which gospel consists in three fundamental 
facts — the death, the burial and the resurrection of Je- 
sus Christ from the dead; and when we feel assured that 
faith in Christ as our personal Savior, and obedience to 



o24 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

his gospel, positively and without doubt, secures our 
redemption from sin, and from all its fearful consequen- 
ces, why perplex and delude ourselves upon mere matters 
of human speculation, and about which the revelation 
of God has nothing to say? 

The apostle Peter understood this matter perfectly, 
when writing "to the strangers scattered throughout 
Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia [Minor] and Bithy- 
nia," he said: "To whom [the propbets] it was revealed, 
tb at not to themselves, but to us [the apostles], they did 
minister the things which are now reported to you by 
them who have preached the gospel to you with the Holy 
Spirit sent down from heaven." (1 Pet. i. 12. ) And in 
the last verse of this same chapter, he emphasizes the 
declaration by saying, "But the word of tbe Lord en- 
dures forever. And this is the word which by the gospel 
is preached to you." Such unmistakable and irrefutable 
testimony as this forever declares all modern systems of 
mystic regeneration unscriptural and false. 

Paul sets the matter before the Corinthian Church 
thus: "For the preaching of the cross [the gospel] is to 
them who perish foolishness ; but to us who are saved, 
it is the power of God." In the same chapter, he declares 
"Christ to be the power of God and the wisdom of God." 
(1 Cor. i. 18, 24.) Thus he writes to the church at Rome : 
"Now to him that is of power to establish you accord- 
ing to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, ac- 
cording to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept 
secret since the world began, but now is made manifest; 
and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the 
commandment of the everlasting God, made known to 
all nations for the obedience of [the] faith." (Rom. xvi. 
25-27.) Paul, speaking to the Corinthians of the things 
that are " prepared for them who love God/' says : "God 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 325 

has revealed them to us by his Spirit; for the Spirit search- 
es all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what 
man knows the things of a man, save the spirit of man 
which is in him? Even so the things of God knows no 
man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, 
not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of 
God, that we might know the things which are freely 
given to us of God ; which things [not abstractions] we 
speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teaches, 
but which the Holy Spirit teaches [through the gospel], 
comparing spiritual things spiritually." (1 Cor. ii. 10- 
13.) The apostle John accords with Peter and Paul 
when he thus expresses himself: " We are of God ; he 
who knows God hears us; hereby know ice the Spirit of 
truth and the spirit of error " (1 John iv. 6.) If, then, 
all these things were brought to the recollection of the 
apostles, and they were guided by inspiration into all the 
truth, and all that truth is now in our possession as re- 
spects the scheme of redemption, what further need have 
we of testimony? 

We intend a thorough investigation of this question, 
and hence the subject of the Spirit will be pursued. 

THE CONFIRMATION OF THE REVEALED WORD. 

Confirm means to make strong, to ratify, to make 
conclusive. That which was legislated into existence by 
the Almighty, and executed by the Son of God, was final- 
ly confirmed, or ratified by the Holy Spirit. The word 
revealed was confirmed by attestations of supernatural 
power. After the apostles received the groat commis- 
sion, '*they went forth and preached (Mark xvi. 20) 
everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirm- 
ing the word with signs following ." Paul says: " Where- 
fore tongues [miracles] are for a sign, not to them who be- 



326 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

lieve, but to them who believe not: but prophesying [teach- 
iyig, as is the meauing in this connection] serves not for 
them who believe not, but for them who believe." (1 
Cor. xiv. 22.) Isaiah says: "Bind up the testimony, seal 
the law among my disciples. And I will wait upon the 
Lord, that hides his face from the house of Jacob, and 
I will look for him. Behold, I and the children whom 
the Lord hath given me, are for signs and for ivonders 
in Israel from the Lord of hosts, who dwelleth in Mount 
Zion." (Isa. viii. 16-18.) According to Isa. viii. 19, 
20, and Rom. x. 6-10, all men are prohibited from seek- 
ing after new revelations. In regard to the confirmation 
of the word, Paul says: "How shall we escape if we 
neglect [we Christians] so great salvation, which at the 
first began to be spoken by the Lord, and wr.s confirmed 
to us by them who heard him. God also bearing them 
witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers 
miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his 
own will." (Heb. ii. 3, 4.) 

We shall now give some illustrations of what is meant 
by the confirmation of the word revealed. A few days 
after the preaching of the gospel in Jerusalem and after 
the establishment of the model Church, Peter, on his 
way to the temple, about three o'clock, cured a man 
who had been lame and helpless from his birth. The 
helpless man expected alms of Peter, but Peter, fasten- 
ing his eyes upon him, with John, said: "Look on us. 
. . . Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have 
give I thee: in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth 
rise up and walk. And he took him by the right hand, 
and lifted him up; and immediately his feet and ankle- 
bones received strength. And he, leaping up, stood and 
walked and entered with them into the temple, walk- 
ing, and leaping, and praising God." (Acts iii. 1-8.) 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 327 

Here is an example of the confirmation of the word of 
the gospel revealed by the Holy Spirit. It was a physi- 
cal miracle, and nothing is said which goes to show that 
Peter preached the gospel to the lame man at this time. 
If the lame man was converted to Christ, it took place 
after the miracle was performed, and by the preaching 
of the gospel. 

We have a fearful illustration of the power of God, 
in those days of miracles, in the case of Ananias and 
Sapphira his wife, whom the Lord instantaneously struck 
down dead, because they lied to the Holy Spirit, by rep- 
resenting that they had laid the price of their entire 
possession at the apostles' feet, when, at the same time, 
they had "kept back part of the price." Surely, if, as 
some preachers boldly allege, God converts sinners to 
Christ by a miracle, this miracle produced a strange ef- 
fect. In consequence of this wonderful display of the 
terrible power of God, "great fear came upon all the 
Church, and upon as many as heard these things. And 
by the hands of the apostles were many signs and won- 
ders wrought among the people; . . . insomuch 
that they brought forth the sick into the streets, and 
laid them on beds and couches, that at least the shadow 
of Peter passing by, might overshadow some of them. 
There came also a multitude out of the cities round 
about to Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them who 
were tormented with evil spirits, and they were healed 
every one." (Acts v.) These miracles were a confirm- 
ation of the word, harmonizing with what Christ said 
to his apostles when he authorized them to go into all 
the world to preach the gospel, and making this prom- 
ise to them — a promise which he never made to any 
other class of men : "And these signs shall follow them 
that believe [these miracles shall be reported to the 
27 



C-8 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 



credit of the apostles, endowed with the Holy Spirit] : 
In my name shall they cast out demons; they shall speak 
with new tongues; they shall take up serpents;" and if 
they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; 
they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." 
And then we learn that "they went forth, and preached 
everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirm- 
ing the word with signs following." (Mark xvi. 16-20.) 

"And there sat a certain man at Lystra, impotent in 
his feet, being a cripple from his mother's womb, who 
had never walked : the same heard Paul speak, who 
steadfastly beholding him, and perceiving that he had 
faith to be healed, said with a loud voice, Stand upright 
on thy feet. And he leaped and walked. And when 
the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their 
voices, saying, The gods have come down to us in the 
likeness of men. And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; 
and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker." 
(Acts xiv. 8-12.) Here was a physical miracle, but not 
moral regeneration, which only can be accomplished by 
bringing the truth — the gospel — which is " the powder 
of God," in contact with the understanding and con- 
science of the sinner. 

While preaching in the streets of Philippi, Paul re- 
stored a certain woman to her right mind, by command- 
ing, in the name of Jesus Christ, the evil spirit of divin- 
ation to come out of her, but the miracle did not convert 
the woman to Christ. In connection with this same 
event, in the same city, while Paul and Silas were sing- 
ing praises to God in the Philippian prison, where they 
had been imprisoned by their pagan persecutors, "sud- 
denly there was a great earthquake, so that the founda- 
tions of the prison were shaken; and immediately all 
the doors were opened, and every one's bands were 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 329 

loosed." (Acts xiv. and xxi.) After this miracle, the 
Philippian jailer heard the word of the Lord, believed in 
the Lord Jesus Christ, and was immediately immersed, 
with all his house, who believed with him, and rejoiced 
with him. It is recorded that while Paul was in Ephe- 
sus, "disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus, for 
the space of two years, that God wrought special mir- 
acles by the hands of Paul, so that from his body were 
brought to the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the 
diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went 
out of them." (Acts xix.) 

Paul, on his journey to Rome, having made his appeal 
to Caesar, while crossing the Mediterranean Sea, was ship- 
wrecked with other prisoners, and he and they cast upon 
the island of Melita. The record reads: "And the bar- 
barous people showed us no little kindness : for they 
kindled a fire and received us every one, because of the 
present rain and because of the cold. And when Paul 
had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the 
fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on 
his hand. And when the barbarians saw the venomous 
beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, 
~No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he has 
escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffers not to live. And 
he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm." 
(Acts xxviii. 1-5.) This miracle did not tell these bar- 
barians who Jesus Christ was; from the miracle itself 
they learned nothing of the life and character of the 
Messiah; learned nothing of the revealed truth, and of 
the plan of salvation; learned nothing of the personal 
obedience to the gospel; did not even learn that they 
were without hope and without God in the world. 

All the miracles recorded in Acts of the Apostles were 
intended to be confirmatory of the revealed word. 



^30 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

These divine attestations were necessary to fully estab- 
lish the religion of Jesus Christ, mid to give it preced- 
ence and superiority over all the religions of earth. But 
while all these miracles were performed with a view of 
opening the eyes of unbelievers, it required, at the same 
time, the power of the revealed truth to affect the heart, 
and to transform the spiritual nature of man. The 
Spirit ever speaks through the revealed truth, and never 
without intelligible language. The belief of the truth, 
and the obedience of the gospel, which saved and sanc- 
tified sinners in the apostolic days, will, by the same appli- 
cation, save sinners now. How dare we make the Holy 
Spirit contradict himself, by adding a supposed power 
to the gospel which God has never revealed, and which 
simply amounts to a priestly assumption? The apostles, 
guided infallibly by the Spirit, preached only Christ 
and him crucified." When theologians and ministerial 
mountebanks torture the Spirit to testify to a mode of 
salvation, in the present day, which he never testified to 
under the direct supervision of the apostles, they are not 
only found guilty of committing an egregious blunder, 
but they are perpetrating a terrible sin. Let us illustrate. 
A case is tried in a civil court. A change of venue is 
called, and the case is transferred to another court. The 
same witnesses are called to testify on both occasions. 
Suppose the witnesses in the second trial contradict the 
testimony they gave on the first trial — what would be 
the verdict of the people? Would they not cry out that 
the witnesses had perjured themselves? Now, then, 
what disposition will God make of men — professedly 
leaders of the people, and professedly servants of Jesus 
Christ — who will make the Holy Spirit contradict his 
own testimony, by teaching a mode of salvation in the 
present age which was not taught in the apostolic age ? 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 381 

Let the people hear what "the Spirit and the Bride say" 
— in intelligible words, which all men can understand. 
While Peter was on the housetop in Joppa, and "thought 
on the vision, the Spirit said to him [in words to be un- 
derstood], Behold, three men seek thee. Arise, there- 
fore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting 
nothing, for I have sent them; ' and Peter, in rehears- 
ing the conversion of Cornelius and his household, thus 
alludes to the case: "And he showed us how he [Cor- 
nelius] had seen an angel in his house, which stood and 
said to him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, 
whose surname is Peter; who shall tell thee words where- 
by thou and all thy house shall be saved." (Acts xi. 13, 
14.) "low the Spirit speaks expressly that in the latter 
times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to 
seducing spirits, and doctrines of demons," etc. (1 Tim. 
iv. 1. ) Thus we see that when the Spirit spoke he used 
words; the words conveyed ideas — conveyed "the mind 
of the Spirit" — and the ideas were always tangible and 
intelligible. 

THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 

We must distinguish between the gift of the Holy 
Spirit as the power of working miracles, and the gift of 
the Holy Spirit as the promise of G-od to his obedient 
and ever-faithful children. Paul says: "There are 
diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are 
differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And 
there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God 
who works all in all. But the manifestation of the 
Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to 
one is given by the Spirit, the word of wisdom, to an- 
other the word of knowledge, by the same Spirit. To 
another, faith, by the same Spirit; to another the gifts 



832 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

of healing, by the same Spirit; to another the working 
of miracles, to another prophecies, to another the dis- 
cerning of spirits, to another divers kinds of tongues, 
to another the interpretation of tongues. But all these 
work that one and the self-same Spirit, dividing to every 
man severally as he will." (1 Cor. xii. 4-11.) 

All these endowments evidently refer to the power of 
working miracles, and must not be confounded with 
"the gift of the Holy Spirit" as a promise made to the 
ordinary Christian, who is not expected to work miracles 
as they were worked in the apostolic age. And yet 
"the gift of the Holy Spirit," as promised on the day 
of Pentecost to the three thousand converts, may have 
included the working of miracles, while the apostles 
were present in person with the churches of Christ. 
Whether this "gift" to the ordinary Christian means 
the actual personal indwelling of the Spirit, or an abstract 
indwelling of the Spirit, or the indwelling of "the mind 
of the Spirit," are questions which have been the source 
of endless and perplexing talk. We do not believe in 
the "word alone" system, nor in the "Spirit alone" 
system ; but we do believe that if the word of the Spirit 
is in the heart of the Christian the Spirit is present with 
the word; the hoiv of it we do not know: we walk by 
faith. We can not conceive of an abstract principle, 
nor of the bare isolated word dwelling separately in the 
heart of a Christian. We confidently assert, because of 
the absence of rebutting testimony, that where the 
word or mind of the Spirit is not received into the heart, 
there the Spirit does not go. 

Paul says: "Let this mind be in you, which was also 
in Christ Jesus." " Let the word of Christ dwell in you 
richly." (Col. iii. 16; Phil. ii. 5.) "The word of 
Christ" evidently is the same as "the mind of Christ." 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 833 



Christ is certainly present with his own word w T herever 
received, but in what metaphysical sense w r e can not ex- 
plain, any more than we can explain how God in the 
physical world is present working in the seed which has 
been deposited in the ground. The body is represented 
as " the temple of the Holy Spirit," because it is by the 
truth which the Holy Spirit has revealed that the 
heart is sanctified, and the body consecrated to the 
service of the Lord. (1 Cor. vi. 19.) It is after the 
sinner obeys the gospel and not before he obeys that he 
receives "the gift of the Holy Spirit." Paul, in address- 
ing Christians at Ephesus, says: "That we should be 
to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. 
In whom you also trusted, after that you heard the word 
of truth, the gospel of your salvation : in whom also 
after that you believed, you were sealed w r ith the Holy 
Spirit of promise, which is the earnest [or pledge] of our 
inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased pos- 
session." (Eph. i. 13.) The promise of the Father is 
that the Spirit shall abide with the Christian forever, and 
through the word be the constant luminary of the 
Church, the temple of God, which is composed of living 
stones or regenerated men and women. 

Christians are represented as "walking after the 
Spirit; " as " minding the things of the Spirit;" as being 
"in the Spirit;" as having the Spirit of Christ; as 
"mortifying the deeds of the body through the Spirit;" 
as being "led by the Spirit;" as having " received the 
Spirit of adoption;" and the Spirit is represented as 
"dwelling in our mortal bodies." (Rom. viii.) In the 
same chapter we learn that the 4 'Spirit bears witness 
with our spirit [the mind of the Spirit bears witness 
with the mind of God's children] that we are the chil- 
dren of God;" that "the Spirit helps our infirmities," 



. I- GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

and that he "makes intercession for us" — the children 
of God. None of these beautiful and expressive terms 
apply to the ungodly and disobedient. They indicate 
the tender and intimate relations which exist between 
the promised Comforter and the adopted children of 
God. The final glorification of the saints depends on 
the fact that the Spirit of God dwells in their mortal 
bodies. Says Paul: "Now if any man have not the 
Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in 
you [not literally], the body [or the passions in the body] 
is dead because of sin ; but the spirit [of the man] is life 
because of the righteousness. But if the Spirit of him 
who raised up Jesus from the dead, dwell in you [Chris- 
tians], he who raised up Christ from the dead, shall also 
quicken [make alive] your mortal bodies by his Spirit 
who dwells in you." From which premises we conclude 
that unless we receive and retain in our hearts "the 
mind of the Spirit" and are led by the words of the 
Spirit, we shall never be raised up to glory and im- 
mortality. They who are the "sons of God" are "led 
by the Spirit of God," and having received "the Spirit 
of adoption," they, as " new-born babes," are enabled to 
cry, "Abba, Father" (Rom. viii.). Paul writes in the 
same style to the Galatian Christians, when he says: 
" Because you are sons [once having been aliens] God 
has sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, 
crying, Abba, Father." He addressed them as the 
adopted sons of God, and not as unbelieving and dis- 
obedient aliens. The Spirit of God strives with the 
wicked world as in the days of Noah, through the word 
of God, which is "the sword of the Spirit," and which 
was wielded by prophets and apostles. 

While it is true that sinners must be convicted by a 
Divine revelation, as revealed by the Spirit, and also be 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 335 

convicted and convinced by the arguments of the Script- 
ures, in order to the obedience of the faith, it is equally 
true that the children of God must "pray in the Spirit, 
and keep themselves in the love of God." (Jude 20, 21.) 
They must ''pray always, with all prayer, and supplica- 
tion in the Spirit." (Eph. vi. 18.) "Where the Spirit 
of the Lord is, there is liberty," because it is "the Law 
of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus that makes us free 
from the law of sin and death." (2 Cor. iii. 17; Rom. 
viii. 2.) "But if you [Christians] are led by the Spirit" 
— the law of the Spirit, or "the Spirit of truth" — you 
are not under the law of sin and death. (Gal. v. 18.) 
" By one Spirit," both Jews and Gentiles have access to 
the Father, and " through the Spirit" the children of 
God are built together, for an habitation of God. (Eph. 
ii. 18-22.) "By one Spirit" — instructed by "the mind 
of the Spirit" — we have all been immersed (ebaptistheemen) 
into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, . . 
and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.'" (1 Coi*. 
xii. 13, 14.) 

The Spirit of God is said to " rest upon " his children 
in tribulation. "If you be reproached for the name of 
Christ, happy are you, for the Spirit of the glory of God 
rests upon you.'" (1 Peter iv. 12.) Christians are said 
to be sanctified by the Spirit. "Elect according to the 
foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification 
of the Spiritunto obedience and sprinkling of the blood 
of Jesus Christ." (1 Peter i. 2, 4.) God's people are 
sealed by the Spirit. "Now he who established us with 
you, in Christ, and has anointed us [typified by the 
anointing of kings under the Jewish dispensation], is 
God, who has also sealed us, and given the earnest 
[pledge] of the Spirit of our hearts." (2 Cor. i. 21, 22.) 
" Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby you are 



336 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

sealed to the day of redemption." (Eph. i. 13, iv. 
30.) 

"The allusion to the seal," says Bickersteth, " as a 
pledge of purchase, would be peculiarly intelligible to 
the Ephesians, for Ephesus was a maritime city, and an 
extensive trade in timber was carried on there, by the 
shipmasters of the neighoring ports. The method of 
purchase was this : The merchant, after selecting his 
timber, stamped it with his own signet, which was an 
acknowledged sign of ownership. He often did not 
carry off* his possession at the time; it was left in the 
harbor with other floats of timber; and in due time the 
merchant sent a trusty agent with the signet, who, find- 
ing that lumber which bore a corresponding impress, 
claimed and brought it away for the Master's use. Thus, 
the Holy Spirit impresses on the soul now, the image of 
Jesus Christ ; and this is the sure pledge of the ever- 
lasting inheritance." 

We have already had something to say on the gift of 
the Spirit; but as it is a question of considerable per- 
plexity, and, as a consequence, has given rise to much 
controversy, we shall further attempt to throw light 
upon it. We shall show that the gift of the Holy Spirit 
was peculiar to the apostolic age. First, we remark, 
that the Spirit, as a personality, is distinct from the gift 
of the Spirit. The gift of the Spirit is a promise, and 
not a command. On the day of Pentecost, Peter said 
to the penitent believers: "Repent, and be immersed 
every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the 
remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the 
Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you, and to your 
children, and to all who are afar off, even as many as 
the Lord our G-od shall call." In Peter's sermon, from 
which the above is quoted (Acts ii.), we have these words : 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 337 

"Therefore, being by the right hand of God exalted, and 
having received of the Father the 'promise of the Holy 
Spirit,he has shed forth this, which you now see and hear." 
In a general sense, all who obey the gospel receive 
the gift of the Spirit by receiving the blessing of God 
through the gospel; for "the gift of God is eternal life 
through Jesus Christ;" but in a special sense, the gift 
of the Holy Spirit is the power of working miracles. 

By reference to the words of Peter just quoted, it will 
be seen that the remission of sins was one thing, and the 
special gift of working miracles in the future altogether 
another thing, as may be seen by tracing out the work 
and preaching of the apostles, consequent upon whose 
preaching the work of performing miracles followed, in 
many places and by diverse methods. This "gift" on the 
day of Pentecost was similar to that bestowed upon the 
household of Cornelius, the first Gentile converts. The 
accompaniments of this special gift were not always the 
same; but, as in the Corinthian Church, it was given to 
every man by the same Spirit to profit withal ; and be- 
cause the Corinthians could work miracles, they were 
puffed up with pride. The gift of the Holy Spirit was 
not always bestowed in the same manner, nor for the 
same purposes; a full explanation of which maybe found 
in 1 Cor. xii. The gift of the Holy Spirit is further 
explained in what took place in the household of Cor- 
nelius, in the city of Csesarea. It is said that when the 
Holy Spirit fell on these Gentile converts, on that event- 
ful occasion, that the Jewish brethren who accompanied 
Peter were astonished, "because that the gift of the 
Holy Spirit was poured out upon the Gentiles." When 
rehearsing this matter before his Jewish brethren, after 
his return to Jerusalem (Acts xi.), Peter said: "And as 
I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them, even as 



338 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

on us [apostles] at the beginning, and I remembered the 
word of the Lord, how he said, John indeed immersed 
in water; but you shall be immersed in the Holy Spirit. 
Since then God gave them the like gift as he did to us 
[apostles] who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, what 
was I, that I could withstand God?" 

That this gift of the Spirit was for a special object, 
and limited to the apostolic period, and that it was 
diverse in its manifestations, can only be made clear by 
an appeal to the facts. Philip, who was only an evan- 
gelist, and not an apostle, had preached in Samaria, and 
there made a number of converts. This news having 
gone to Jernsalem, the headquarters of the apostles, the 
apostles sent down Peter and John, both apostles, who, 
on arriving at the place, discovered the fact "that the 
Holy Spirit had fallen upon none of them; only they 
were immersed in the name of the Lord Jesus," through 
whom they had received the remission of sins, and, of 
course, were now constituted members of the "one body." 
The apostles then prayed "that they might receive the 
Holy Spirit;" and, having "laid their hands upon them 
they received the Holy Spirit;" in pursuance of which 
miraculous gift they were at once enabled to perform 
miracles, as did the apostles themselves. (Acts viii.) 
At another time, when Paul arrived at Ephesus, he 
found certain of John's disciples there, who had never 
heard of the wonderful demonstrations of the Holy 
Spirit, but knew only of the baptism of John ; but who. 
after listening attentively to the preaching of Paul, 
"were immersed in the name of the Lord Jesus," in 
obedience to which command they obtained the remis- 
sion of their sins, which was in strict harmony with the 
organic law of induction into Christ's kingdom, as an 
nounced in the great commission. Then "when Paul 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 339 

laid his hands upon them [who were already Christians], 
the Holy 'Spirit came upon them;" and, as a result, corre- 
sponding with similar cases, "they spake with tongues and 
prophesied." (Acts xix.) 

Paul, writing to the Corinthian Church, whose mem- 
bers grew proud by the working of miracles, thus writes : 
"But the manifestation [or gift] of the Spirit is given 
to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by 
the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of 
knowledge by the same Spirit; to another faith by the 
same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same 
Spirit; to another the working of miracles; to another 
prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another 
divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of 
tongues; but all these work that one and the selfsame 
Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. " (1 
Cor. xii. 7-11.) 

With the passing away of the apostles, these miracu- 
lous manifestations ceased. They all tended toward the 
perfection of the body of Christ. When the primitive 
Church came into "the unity of the faith, and of the 
knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto 
the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ . . . 
making increase of the body to the edification of itself 
in love" the special gifts of working miracles were dis- 
pensed with, to give way to the more excellent way which 
works by love. 

THE WITNESS OF THE SPIRIT. 

"The Spirit itself [himself] bears witness with our 
spirit that we are the children of God." This language 
was addressed specifically to Christians — to the children 
of God — and not to sinful and unconverted men. As 
God's faithful and believing children we receive the 



340 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

"mind of the Spirit;" this mind of the Spirit is the 
testimony of the Scriptures, for "the testimony of Jesus 
is the Spirit of prophecy." The "mind of the Spirit" 
contains the conditions of salvation. The gospel is the 
mind of the Spirit revealed. In the revelation made by 
the Spirit, we find the mind or the will of the heavenly 
Father. The apostles, under the guidance of the Holy 
Spirit, proclaimed the last will and testament of the 
great Testator. We receive the testimony; we believe 
the testimony; our faith is founded on testimony; we 
obey the conditions of the gospel and obtain the re- 
mission of our sins; consequently the mind of the spirit 
of the believer bears witness with the Spirit, or, which 
is the same thing, with the mind of the Spirit, that he 
is a child of God, because he has received, and believed, 
and obeyed the things revealed by the Holy Spirit. 
Hence also, the Christian is "led by the Spirit of God." 
The sinner must be convicted by the revealed facts of the 
Spirit, and obey the truth of the Spirit, before he can 
claim to be led by the Spirit. "For as many as are led 
by the Spirit of God [led by the instructions of the Spirit 
of God], they are the sons of God." (Rom. viii. 16.) 
Paul's admonition to Christians is this: " Walk in the 
Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh." 
"But if you are led by the Spirit — 'by the law of the 
Spirit' — you are not under the [Mosaic] law." (Gal. v.) 
The "groanings" spoken of by Paul in Rom. viii. 22, 
26, are not the "groanings" of the Holy Spirit, but the 
groanings of this flesh, under the dominion of sin. 
Hear Paul's explanation in verse 27 : "And he who 
searches the hearts [by the truth] knows what is the 
mind of the Spirit, because he makes intercession for the 
saints [not for the sinners] according to the will of God. h 
Intercession, in behalf of the saints, is made through 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 341 

the revealed will of God. It is the promises of God 
that help our infirmities. Paul, in this chapter, is speak- 
ing of the redemption of the bodies of the saints. The 
body of the saint is in bondage, groaning and travail- 
ing to be "delivered from the bondage of corruption 
into the glorious liberty of the children of God." The 
hope of the Christian is the redemption of his body from 
the grave. Paul says distinctly: "Even we ourselves 
[we Christians] groan within ourselves, waiting for the 
adoption, viz., the redemption of our body*' from the pains 
and penalties of physical death. 

Resisting the Holy Spirit. — The blessed Stephen, 
standing in the august presence of the Jewish Sanhedrim* 
after having given utterance to a most searching sermon, 
based on a long line of historical evidence, and deduced 
from their own Scriptures, and proving by them that 
this Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, thus addressing 
them: "You stiff necked and uncircumcised in heart 
and ears, you do always resist the Holy Spirit : as your 
fathers did, so do you/' And the manner of resisting 
the Holy Spirit is thus expressed in the succeeding verse' : 
"Which of the prophets have not your fathers perse- 
cuted? And they have slain them who showed before 
of the coming of the Just One; of whom you have now 
been the murderers and betrayers; who have received 
the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept 
it. When they heard these things [these words of burn- 
ing truth] they were cut to the heart." ( Vets vii.) 

By reference to the ninth chapter m Neheniiah, we 
may ascertain how the Jewish fathers resisted the Spirit 
of God. The prophet, referring to the guidance of the 
Israelites through the wilderness, says: "Thou gavest 
thy good Spirit also to instruct them. . . . Never- 
theless, they were disobedient, and rebelled against thee, 



342 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

and cast thy law behind their backs, and slew thy 
prophets who testified against them. . . . Yet many 
years didst thou forbear them, and testified against them 
by thy Spirit in thy prophets; yet they would not give 
ear; therefore thou gavest them into the hand of the 
people of the lands." God clothed the prophets with 
bis Spirit. "The Spirit of the Lord clothed Gideon." 
" Then the Spirit clothed Amasai. " " The Spirit of God 
clothed Zechariah." (Judges vi. 34; 1 Chron. xii. 18; 
2 Chron. xxiv. 20.) God inspired the prophets; clothed 
with authority, the prophets bore the message of God 
to the people; by resisting the prophets the people re- 
sisted the words of the prophets; by resisting the words 
of the prophets the people resisted the Spirit of God 
which was in these prophets. In the same manner the 
Lord clothed the apostles with the Holy Spirit. Clothed 
with the Spirit, the apostles bore the message or the 
words of salvation to the nations of earth. By resist- 
ing the words of the apostles, ungodly men resisted the 
Spirit of God, who spoke through them. These were 
ministers extraordinary. Ministers ordinary now take 
up the same words, and bear them to the people. "The 
gospel is the power of God unto salvation," whether 
preached by the apostles or by uninspired men. All 
who resist the truth in the present day, resist the Spirit 
of God precisely in the same sense that wicked people 
did under the preaching of the apostles, because it was 
the Spirit of God that revealed the same truth. The 
word of God is the sword of the Spirit, and when rebels 
run against that instrument, they plunge against that 
which is sharper than any two-edged sword. (Heb. iv.) 
While it is true that in this way sinners resist the 
truth, and therefore the Spirit that revealed the truth, it 
is equally true that Christians u quench the Spirit" by 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 343 

neglecting to be 'Med by the Spirit" wherever Christian 
duty has been pointed out. If any one produces the 
" fruits of the Spirit," we may know that such an one is 
under the power and influence of the Spirit. If any 
professed Christian produce not the fruits of the Spirit, 
but is sour and crabbed and petulant and ugly in dis- 
position, and withal covetous and avaricious, though he 
professes to have been baptized in the Spirit, we may 
conclude at once that that person is not under the direct- 
ing power of the Spirit. 

Personality of the Holy Spirit. — The Holy Spirit is 
not an abstraction, or a subtle influence, or a mystic 
effluence, or an ethereal intangibility any more than the 
Father is, any more than the Son is. The Holy Spirit 
is always represented as speaking by intelligible language. 
When the antediluvians resisted the Spirit of God, 
who spoke through Noah, and resisted the Spirit by 
resisting the words of the Spirit, God said: "My Spirit 
shall not always strive with man." (Gen. vi. 3.) "Where- 
fore, as the Holy Spirit says, To-day if you will hear his 
[not its] voice, harden not your hearts." (Heb. iii. 7.) 
"The Spirit and the Bride say, Come, and let him that 
hears say, Come; and let him that is athirst come; and 
whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely." 
(Rev. xxii. 17.) "He that hath an ear, let him hear 
what the Spirit says to the churches." (Rev. ii. and iii.) 
"The Spirit speaks expressly that in the last days some 
shall depart from the faith." (1 Tim. iv. 1.) If we had 
space, and deemed the fact necessary to the argument, 
we could adduce an abundance of Scripture to show 
that the Holy Spirit, as a personal being, can be vexed, 
blasphemed, lied against, tempted, insulted. This can 
not be predicated of a mere influence ; for an influence 
can not be vexed. 
28 



344 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

" Blessed are the dead that die in the Lord. Yea, says 
the Spirit, they rest from their labors, and their works 
do follow them/' 

THE LAW OF THE SPIRIT. 

These expressions are found in the eighth chapter of 
Romans: 

"The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has 
made me free from the law of sin and death." 

" Who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. '- 

"For they that are after the flesh, do mind the things 
of the flesh ; but they that are after the Spirit, the things 
of the Spirit." 

' 'But you are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if sc 
be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now, if any 
man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." 

"But if Christ be in you, the body is dead, because 
of sin; but the Spirit is life, because of righteousness." 

"But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from 
the dead, dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the 
dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit 
that dwelleth in } T ou." 

"For if you live after the flesh, you shall die; but if 
ye through the Spirit, do mortify the deeds of the body, 
ye shall live." 

"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they 
are the sons of God." 

"But you have not received the spirit of bondage 
again to fear; but you have received the spirit of adop- 
tion, whereby we cry, 'Abba, Father!'" 

"The Spirit also bears witness with our spirit, that we 
are the children of God." 

"Who have the first-fruits of the Spirit?" 

"Likewise the Spirit also helps our infirmities." 

"But the Spirit itself makes intercession for us." 

' 'And he that searches the heart knows what is the* 
mind of the Spirit." 

In the first citation, we see at a glance that Paul is 
comparing the law of the Spirit — the gospel — with the 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 345 

law of Moses. It was the truth contained in the law 
of the Spirit, that made Paul free from the bondage of 
sin and death. That is, the conditions of salvation are 
found in that law, which, by the Holy Spirit, was sent 
down from heaven. (1 Pet. i. 12.) All the epistolary 
writings were addressed to Christians, and not to the 
world. Hence, these writings can not be applied to the 
world. Christians are not to follow after and be con- 
trolled by the instincts of the flesh ; but they must fol- 
low the Spirit, or pay strict attention to the things re- 
vealed by the Spirit. Christians are not exhorted to 
look after the nature, the essence and the origin of the 
Spirit. Now "the things of the Spirit" are the facts and 
precepts and promises of God that are found in the gos- 
pel. The gospel contains the good news of salvation. 

Christians can not walk literally in the Spirit, for since 
the Spirit is an intelligent Person, and not an essence, 
how could such a thing be? That which is flesh itself 
can not walk literally in the flesh, but the carnal man is 
subject to the laws of an animal nature. It is not con- 
ceivable that a Christian can literally walk in the Spirit, 
and the Spirit literally dwell in him at one and the same 
time. This would be a palpable contradiction in terms. 
A Christian can enjoy the Spirit of Christ, without the 
necessity of the actual presence of Christ. We receive 
the Spirit of Christ by receiving his words; for his 
"words are life and they are spirit." His words com- 
municate eternal life to the children of God. " Let the 
word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom." The 
germinating power is in "the seed of the kingdom." 
The word of God is the seed of the kingdom. Without 
receiving the doctrine of Christ, we can not receive the 
Spirit of Christ. And, by parity of reasoning, we can 
not receive the Spirit, unless we accept " the law of the 



34G GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

Spirit." It is by living a life of righteousness that we 
secure to ourselves the Spirit of life. 

The same Spirit that raised up Jesus from the dead, 
will also quicken our mortal bodies — raise them from the 
dead — if we retain in our hearts the germinating prin- 
ciple of life which, by the gospel, is communicated to 
us. If we follow the promptings of our animal desires, 
we shall surely die; but if, through the Spirit — minding 
the things of the Spirit — we mortify the base passions 
of our bodies, we shall live. Only those are the sons of 
God who are led by the Spirit of God. As the Spirit is 
not here in person to lead us, and we can not conceive 
of being led by an essence or an influence, we must con- 
clude that we are led by the "mind of the Spirit," that 
we might know, by positive knowledge, the things that 
are freely given to us. (1 Cor. ii. 12.) Paul says: "I 
am crucified with Christ; nevertheless, Hive; yet not I, 
but Christ liveth in me; and the life which I now live in 
the flesh, Hive by the faith of the Son of God, who loved 
me, and gave himself for me." (Gal. ii. 20.) Do not 
all Christians live in the same*manner? In Gal. iii. 2 ? 
he thus questions the Galatians: "This only would I 
learn of you, Eeceived you the Spirit by the works of 
the law, or by the hearing of faith f Are you so foolish? 
having begun in the Spirit, are you now made perfect by 
the flesh?" These Christians were under the dispensa- 
tion of the Spirit, not under the dispensation of Moses. 
In the same chapter, we read "that the blessing of Abra- 
ham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; 
that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through 
faith ; which promise is the blessing of salvation through 
Christ." In Gal. v., we are represented as obtaining 
our liberty through Christ. In Romans, we are made 
free by "the law of the Spirit;" or, in other words, by 



REFORMATORY MOVEMENTS. 347 

the gospel of Christ. In the fifth verse, again, we read: 
" For we, through the Spirit, wait for the hope of right- 
eousness by faith." These Galatians were exhorted to 
"walk in the Spirit" — in the dispensation of the Spirit, 
and not in the "lust of the flesh," as those under the 
law. " But if you be led of the Spirit, you are not un- 
der the law." This is Paul's argument throughout — 
running a parallel between the law and the gospel, for 
the benefit of those Judaizing Christians who troubled 
the churches. 

We receive "the Spirit of adoption," and are made 
"fellow-citizens with the saints in light," by being "im- 
mersed into the one body," under the dispensation and 
direction of the "one Spirit." The Spirit, or "the mind 
of the Spirit," "bears witness with our spirit," or with 
the mind of our spirit, that we "are the children of God," 
which is predicated by the fact that we are led by the 
revelations of the Spirit. Consequently, wherever the 
mind or the words of the Spirit go, there the Spirit is 
present; but in what special sense we presume not to 
know, any more than we know how God is present in a 
grain of corn to cause it to grow. We pretend to know 
nothing about final causes. In all these operations we 
walk by faith, not by sight. The Spirit that helps our 
infirmities can not be an abstract, ethereal Spirit, or a 
subtle influence ; and the Spirit therefore that intercedes 
in our behalf, must intercede through some medium; 
and, hence, to save ourselves from the bewilderment of 
all mysticism, we must conclude that "the mind of the 
Spirit" is that medium, and that the word of God is the 
mind of the Spirit. The consolations of the Spirit come 
to the child of God through the revelations of the Spirit. 
And the Spirit tells us by revelation, "That eye hath not 
seen, nor ear heard, nor hath it entered the heart of man, 



348 GOSPEL PRINCIPLES. 

the things which God hath, laid up for them who love 
him.'' If the consolations of the Spirit do not come to 
the Christian through the revelations of the Spirit, then 
the whole subject is wrapped in impenetrable mysticism. 
It is all summed up in a few words by Paul to Timothy: 
"Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast 
heard of me, in faith and love, which is in Christ Jesus. 
That good thing which was committed to thee, keep, by 
the Holy Spirit which dwells in us." Satan is ever try- 
ing to catch away that good thing — the word of G-od — 
out of our hearts, lest we should believe and be saved. 
(Luke viii. 12.) 



THE END. 



